MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
District: Nashoba Valley Technical High School
Corrective Action Plan Forms
Program Area: Special Education
Prepared by: Melissa LeRay (Director of Special Education) and Matthew Ricard (Dean of
Students)
CAP Form will expand to as many lines as necessary. Before completing and emailing to
pqacap@doe.mass.edu, please see separate Instructions for Completing Corrective Action Plans.
All corrective action must be fully implemented and all noncompliance corrected as soon as
possible and no later than one year from the issuance of the Coordinated Program Review Final
Report to the school or district.
Mandatory One-Year Compliance Date: September 26, 2011
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Rating: Partially Implemented
Criterion & Topic: SE 1 Assessments are
appropriately selected and interpreted for
students referred for evaluation
Department CPR Finding: A review of the student records indicated that assessments are not always
tailored to assess specific areas of educational or related developmental need, or selected and
administered to reflect aptitude and achievement levels and related developmental needs. Often it was
noted that the same battery of assessments was administered regardless of the suspected disability.
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: In an attempt to be thorough, assessments were
conducted which automatically included a review of the student’s current achievement levels in
Reading, Writing, Oral Language, and Math in addition to the full cognitive profile. As a result of the
Coordinated Program Review, all testing conducted in the 2010/2011 school year, and moving forward,
will focus specifically on the identified area of need.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Implementation: Melissa LeRay, Director of
Corrective Action Activity: Currently
Special Education
implemented
1
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: The procedural manual has been updated
(October 2010) to include language specific to the finding.
Excerpt from page 9: “Each August, the Director of Special Education creates a
list of the evaluations that are due to be conducted during the following school year.
Consent to Test forms are sent home in advance of the anticipated testing date. Once
the signed form is returned, the Director of Special Education meets with the staff
member who will be conducting the testing to ascertain the specific needs of the
student in terms of evaluation. Testing instruments are selected based on the
student’s identified disability and are implemented to target the specific area of
educational or related developmental need.”
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: The Director of Special Education schedules all
testing when the Consent to test form is received by the district. She will work with the employee who
will be conducting the assessment to ensure that each test is reflective of the student’s identified area of
educational or related developmental need.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: SE 1 Assessments are
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Partially Approved
appropriately selected and
interpreted for students referred for
evaluation
Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval:
Disapproved
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): Submit evidence that the updated procedure manual,
addressing how evaluations are to be selected based on the student’s identified disability and
implemented to target the specific area of educational or related developmental need, has been
reviewed with the appropriate staff members. Please include the title/role of staff attending with a
signed attendance form, the agenda indicating that this information has been reviewed and the name
and title of the presenter, by February 21, 2011.
Submit a report of the results of an internal review of student records in which assessments were
conducted after this information had been reviewed, and include the following information by April
25, 2011:
1. The number of student records reviewed
2. The number of student records that contain assessments addressing all areas of specific needs
of the student.
3. For all records not in compliance with this criterion, determine the root cause(s) of the noncompliance; and
4. The district’s plan to remedy the non-compliance.
*Please note when conducting internal monitoring the district must maintain the following
documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of student names and
grade levels for the records reviewed; b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the
review, their role(s) and signature(s).
Progress Report Due Date(s): February 21, 2011 and April 25, 2011
2
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Rating: Partially Implemented
Criterion & Topic: SE 4 Reports of assessment
results
Department CPR Finding: A review of the student records indicated that reports of assessment
results do not consistently define in detail and in educationally relevant and common terms the
student’s needs, offering explicit means of meeting those needs.
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: The procedure for documenting the instructional
recommendations as a result of the assessments was updated for the school year 2008/2009 as a result
of recommendations made by the mid-cycle review team.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Implementation: Melissa LeRay, Director of
Corrective Action Activity: Completed with
Special Education
evidence from 10/24/2008 and ongoing
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: All testing reports completed from 10/24/2008
through the present contain recommendations for instructional interventions. Please see attached
document labeled “SE-4” which gives examples of the recommendations written in the testing reports.
One example per month is provided from the period of October 2008 through June 2010.
Additionally, please note that the Special Education Manual has been updated (October 2010) to
include the following language: “All testing reports are required to include a section in the
written summation of the evaluation, after the testing results summary, which gives
suggestions for instructional interventions or accommodations that would benefit the
student based on the testing results.”
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: The Director of Special Education previews all
assessment results before they are sent to the parents to ensure that they conform to the expectations
established by the guidelines.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: SE 4 Reports of
assessment results
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Partially Approved
Disapproved
Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval:
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): Submit evidence indicating that the procedure for
assessment reports defining in detail and in educationally relevant and common terms the student’s
needs, offering explicit means of meeting those needs, has been addressed with appropriate school
personnel who conduct student evaluations. Please include the title/role of staff attending with a signed
attendance form, the agenda indicating that this information has been reviewed and the name and title
of the presenter, by February 21, 2011.
Submit a report of the results of an internal review of student records in which assessments were
conducted after the training, include the following information by April 25, 2011:
1. The number of student records reviewed.
2. The number of student records that contain a summary of educationally relevant
3
recommendations.
3. For all records not in compliance with this criterion, determine the root cause(s) of the noncompliance and
4. The district’s plan to remedy the non-compliance.
*Please note when conducting internal monitoring the district must maintain the following
documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of student names and
grade levels for the records reviewed; b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the
review, their role(s) and signature(s).
Progress Report Due Date(s): February 21, 2011 and April 25, 2011
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: SE 6 Determination of transition Rating: Partially Implemented
services
Department CPR Finding: A review of the student records and interviews indicated that IEP Teams
are discussing transitional needs of students at age 14 and this information is documented on the
Transition Planning Form; however, Transition Planning Forms are not consistently reviewed
annually and updated, as appropriate.
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: All Transition Plans are reviewed and updated annually,
however the information contained in them did not change substantially over the course of the
student’s high school career. As a result of this finding, the Director of Special Education met with
the special education teachers who, as the liaison for the student, update the transition plan for the
annual review meeting held each year. The meeting was held the second week of school and included
a detailed discussion of the need to update the Transition Planning Form more thoroughly and to
include specific attributes that are less common in the traditional academic setting, including the Cooperative work experience, the Career Cruising testing conducted for all freshmen, and the requirement
to complete four years of Community Service.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Implementation: Melissa LeRay, Director of
Corrective Action Activity: This action was
Special Education
implemented at the start of the 2010/20111
school year and is ongoing.
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: An example of a completed Transition Planning
Form is attached in addition to the agenda from the first Special Education department meeting of the
2010-2011 school year which indicates that the discussion was held regarding the Transition Planning
process.
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: The Director of Special Education reviews all
documents that will be presented at the IEP meeting prior to the meeting. As a result, the Director of
Special Education will include a thorough review of the Transition Plans as a component of the
meeting preparation and will address any that are not substantially updated.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: SE 6 Determination of
transition services
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Partially Approved
4
Disapproved
Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval:
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): Submit a report of the results of an internal review of
records with regard to reviewing and updating transition planning forms annually; the internal review
should include records in which a Team meeting was held after the Special Education Department
Meeting on September 13, 2010. Include the following information in the internal review and submit
this information by February 21, 2011:
1. The number of student records reviewed
2. The number of student records that contain a Transition Planning Form that has been updated
or revised.
3. For all records not in compliance with this criterion, determine the root cause(s) of the noncompliance; and
4. The district’s plan to remedy the non-compliance.
*Please note when conducting internal monitoring the district must maintain the following
documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of student names and
grade levels for the records reviewed; b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the
review, their role(s) and signature(s).
Progress Report Due Date(s): February 21, 2011
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: SE 7 Transfer of parental rights
at age of majority and student participation and
consent at the age of majority
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: A review of the student records indicated that upon reaching the age of
18, the school district is not consistently implementing procedures to obtain consent from the student to
continue the student’s special education program. In addition, there was no evidence in the student
records that students over the age of 18 chose to share or delegate decision making with their parents,
or the parent sought and received guardianship from a court of competent jurisdiction, but the parents
continued to sign the IEP
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: The Age of Majority was always noted in the invitation
to attend the team meeting when the student was seventeen years old and the Age of Majority
discussion was held as a component under the Additional Information section on the signatory page of
the IEP with the following statement: “At the age of majority (18), educational decision making
rights transfer to the student.” However, as a result of the review, numerous additional pages
have been incorporated into the IEP development process when the student is seventeen years
of age to document more thoroughly the official nature of the transfer of rights.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Implementation: Melissa LeRay, Director of
Corrective Action Activity: September 2010
Special Education
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: An example of the five-page Age of Majority
notice currently in use is attached in the document titled SE-7.
5
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: The Director of Special Education will monitor the
coming of age of each student and develop the paperwork for the transfer of rights when a student is
seventeen years old.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: SE 7 Transfer of parental
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Partially Approved
rights at age of majority and student
participation and consent at the age
of majority
Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval:
Disapproved
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): Submit evidence indicating that the procedure for
documenting the decision the student has made upon reaching the age of 18 in the student record has
been addressed with appropriate school personnel. Also submit evidence that decision-making
authority/transfer of rights information has been reviewed with appropriate staff. Please include the
title/role of staff attending with a signed attendance form, the agenda indicating that this information
has been reviewed and the name and title of the presenter, by February 21, 2011.
Submit a report of the results of an internal review of records of students over the age of 18, conduct
the internal review after the required information has been reviewed with staff. Include the following
information and submit the internal review by April 25, 2011:
1. The number of student records reviewed.
2. The number of student records in compliance with these requirements.
3. For all records not in compliance with this criterion, determine the root cause(s) of the noncompliance; and
4. The district’s plan to remedy the non-compliance.
*Please note when conducting internal monitoring the district must maintain the following
documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of student names and
grade levels for the records reviewed; b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the
review, their role(s) and signature(s).
Progress Report Due Date(s): February 21, 2011 and April 25, 2011
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: SE 13 Progress reports and
content
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: A review of the student records indicated that progress reports do not
consistently address the student’s progress towards the annual goals in the IEP.
6
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: The section of the procedural manual for Special
Education that pertains to progress reports has been updated (October 2010) as follows:
“Progress Reports:
Progress reports are typed directly into the X2
student management software system by the Special Education service providers
which currently includes special education teachers, a contracted speech therapist,
and the student’s guidance counselor as needed. The service providers comment
specifically on the progress the student has made toward meeting the goal and
objectives stated in the student’s IEP and delineated on the Service Delivery Grid.
Service Providers know, in advance of the printing of the school’s report cards,
exactly which day the progress reports will be pulled from the IEP software and
printed by the Secretary of Student Services. The Director of Special Education gives
the due dates to the secretary, who then e-mails the printing dates to each of the
service providers. Prior to mailing, the progress reports are checked by the Director
of Special Education and the secretary to ensure that all have comments that
specifically reflect the student’s progress on the current goals and objectives in the
IEP.”
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Implementation: Melissa LeRay, Director of
Corrective Action Activity: December 2010
Special Education
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: The first round of Progress Reports will be
completed at the end of the first trimester. December 3rd is the close of the first marking period this
year. As a result of the finding, the need for greater specificity in progress reports was discussed in
great detail at the Special Education Department Meeting held on September 13, 2010. Please see
attachment SE 13.
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: The Director of Special Education will be
responsible for checking Progress Reports to ensure that they specifically address the goals of the IEP.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: SE 13 Progress reports
and content
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Partially Approved
Disapproved
Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval:
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): Submit a report of the results of student records with
progress reports completed after this information was reviewed at the Special Education Department
Meeting on September 13, 2010. Include the following information and submit the internal review by
February 21, 2011:
1. The number of student record progress reports reviewed.
2. The number of student records that contain progress reports addressing the student’s progress
towards the annual goals in the IEP.
3. For all records not in compliance with this criterion, determine the root cause(s) of the noncompliance and
4. The district’s plan to remedy the non-compliance.
*Please note when conducting internal monitoring the district must maintain the following
7
documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of student names and
grade levels for the records reviewed; b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the
review, their role(s) and signature(s).
Progress Report Due Date(s): February 21, 2011
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: SE 18A IEP development and
content
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: A review of the student records indicated that not all IEPs address all
areas of the most current IEP format. For example, the Present Levels of Educational Performance B
(PLEP B) section was often blank even though other educational needs were evident in the IEP, and
IEPs did not include specially designed instruction. In addition, IEPs were not always updated
annually and often included the same goals from year to year.
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: Any PLEP-Bs that were left blank were written by
sending districts, not NVTHS as the PLEP-B is always completed in the initial transition meeting to
address needs related to the vocational experience. However, the clarification regarding the level of
specificity in the annual updates is warranted. As a result of the finding, the need to update the PLEPB with greater specificity was discussed in great detail at the Special Education Department Meeting
held on September 13, 2010.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Implementation: Melissa LeRay, Director of
Corrective Action Activity: September 2010
Special Education
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Please see attachment SE 18A
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: The Director of Special Education previews each
IEP prior to its submission as a draft in the team meeting. As a result, that person will be held
responsible for ensuring that the PLEP-B section is updated with greater specificity each year.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: SE 18A IEP development
and content
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Partially Approved
Disapproved
Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval:
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): Submit a report of the results of an internal review of IEP
PLEP B pages completed after this information was reviewed at the Special Education Department
Meeting on September 13, 2010. Please include the following information and submit the internal
review by February 21, 2011:
1. The number of student records reviewed.
2. The number of student records that include appropriately completed Present Levels of
Educational Performance B (PLEP B) sections of the IEP.
3. For all records not in compliance with this criterion, determine the root cause(s) of the noncompliance; and
8
4. The district’s plan to remedy the non-compliance.
*Please note when conducting internal monitoring the district must maintain the following
documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of student names and
grade levels for the records reviewed; b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the
review, their role(s) and signature(s).
Progress Report Due Date(s): February 21, 2011
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: SE 18B Determination of
placement; provision of IEP to parent
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: A review of the student records and staff interviews indicated that if the
IEP was given to the parent at the Team meeting, the district would not provide the required Notice of
Proposed School District Action (N1 form).
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: The Notice of Proposed School District Action (N1
form) is completed for each IEP. This change in practice occurred immediately following the reporting
out at the close of the visit in April of 2010 and continues to be in place.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Implementation: Melissa LeRay, Director of
Corrective Action Activity: April 2010
Special Education
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: A sample of a completed N1 form is attached in
the document labeled SE 18B
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: The Director of Special Education is responsible
for ensuring that the N1 form is completed at the conclusion of the team meeting.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: SE 18B Determination of
placement; provision of IEP to parent
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Partially Approved
Disapproved
Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval:
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): ): Submit evidence indicating that the procedure for
providing a completed school district proposal (N1 form) to parents has been addressed with
appropriate school personnel. Please include the title/role of staff attending with a signed attendance
form, the agenda indicating that this information has been reviewed and the name and title of the
presenter, by February 21, 2011.
Submit a report of the results of an internal review of student records in which an IEP was provided
after the training. Include the following information and submit the results by April 25, 2011:
1. The number of student records reviewed.
2. The number of student records that contain N1 forms.
3. For all records not in compliance with this criterion, determine the root cause(s) of the noncompliance; and
9
4. The district’s plan to remedy the non-compliance.
*Please note when conducting internal monitoring the district must maintain the following
documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of student names and
grade levels for the records reviewed; b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the
review, their role(s) and signature(s).
Progress Report Due Date(s): February 21, 2011 and April 25, 2011
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: SE 24 Notice to parent
regarding proposal or refusal to initiate or change
the identification, evaluation, or educational
placement of the child or the provision of FAPE
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: A review of the student records indicated that the narrative description in
the Notice of Proposed School District Action (N1 form) did not consistently contain sufficient detail of
the school district’s actions. For example, the N1 form did not indicate what action the district was
proposing to take or what evaluation procedure, test, record or report was used as a basis for the
proposed action. In addition, the N1 form was not always given to parents when proposing an initial
evaluation or re-evaluation, and was not sent to parents, if the parents left the IEP Team meeting with
a completed IEP.
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: The Notice of Proposed School District Action (N1
form) use has amended to identify in greater detail the proposed action. The N1 has always been sent
when proposing an initial evaluation or a re-evaluation, but will now be stapled to the Consent to Test
form to identify that they are in conjunction with each other in the files.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Implementation: Melissa LeRay, Director of
Corrective Action Activity: May 2010
Special Education
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Please see the attached sample titled SE 24
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: The Director of Special Education will be
responsible for ensuring that the N1 form contains sufficient detail of the school district’s proposed
actions. The Administrative Assistant will staple the N1 form to the Consent to Test form in the file if
the form is used to propose an evaluation.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: SE 24 Notice to parent
regarding proposal or refusal to
initiate or change the identification,
evaluation, or educational placement
of the child or the provision of FAPE
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Partially Approved
Disapproved
Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval:
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): Submit evidence that special education teachers have
been trained on specific information to be included in the Notice of Proposed School District Action
10
(N1 form). Please include the title/role of staff attending with a signed attendance form, the agenda
indicating that this information has been reviewed and the name and title of the presenter, by February
21, 2011.
Submit a report of the results of the internal monitoring conducted after this information has been
reviewed, and include the following information by April 25, 2011:
1. The number of student records reviewed.
2. The number of student records that contained a complete and detailed Notice(s) of Proposed
School District Action.
3. For all records not in compliance with this criterion, determine the root cause(s) of the noncompliance; and
4. The district’s plan to remedy the non-compliance.
*Please note when conducting internal monitoring the district must maintain the following
documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of student names and
grade levels for the records reviewed; b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the
review, their role(s) and signature(s).
Progress Report Due Date(s): February 21, 2011 and April 25, 2011
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: SE 32 Parent advisory council
for special education
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: A review of the documentation and interviews indicated that the special
education parent advisory council (PAC) does not have officers or by-laws regarding officers and
operational procedures. The documentation reviewed included evidence of workshops on the rights of
students and their parents and guardians under state and federal special education laws in previous
years, but not for the current year. In addition, interviews indicated that PAC duties have not included
advising the district on matters that pertain to the education and safety of students with disabilities, or
meeting regularly with school officials to participate in the planning, development, and evaluation of
the school district’s special education programs.
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: Efforts have been made through the school’s website
and through traditional mailings to foster greater participation in the special education parent advisory
council (PAC). Meetings have been held a minimum of three times per year (once per trimester) and
have been scheduled at different times of the day and various days of the week in an effort to reach
more of the constituents. In addition, one meeting was presented both live and in webcast format last
year in an effort to reach greater numbers. At this point, the Director of Special Education will create a
Special Education PAC survey and mail it to the parents along with a stamped self-addressed envelope
asking for greater input in the PAC, suggestions for future topics, and possible revisions to the existing
procedures.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Implementation: Melissa LeRay, Director of
Corrective Action Activity: November 2010
Special Education
11
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: A survey is currently being developed and will be
mailed along with the invitation to attend the November PAC meeting.
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: The Director of Special Education will devise and
mail the special education parent advisory council (PAC) survey, will compile the data received, and
will arrange meetings to meet the needs of the parents most beneficially.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: SE 32 Parent advisory
council for special education
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Partially Approved
Disapproved
Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: The district did not address the lack of officers and bylaws, evidence of recent workshops or the PAC’s participation in the planning, development, and
evaluation of the school district’s special education programs, as well as advising the district on matters
that pertain to the education and safety of students with disabilities.
Department Order of Corrective Action: Obtain from the PAC the list of PAC officers and by-laws.
Schedule the date of the workshop on the rights of students and their parents and guardians under state
and federal special education laws. Also develop the plan to ensure the PAC’s participation in the
planning, development and evaluation of the district’s special education programs, as well as advising
the district on matters that pertain to the education and safety of students with disabilities.
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): Submit the list of PAC officers, by-laws and the date of
the workshop on the rights of students and their parents and guardians under state and federal special
education laws for the 2010-2011 school year. Submit the plan for the PAC’s participation in the
planning, development and evaluation of the district’s special education programs, as well as advising
the district on matters that pertain to the education and safety of students with disabilities. Submit this
information by February 21, 2011.
Progress Report Due Date(s): February 21, 2011
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: SE 45 Procedures for suspension
up to 10 days and after 10 days: General
requirements
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: A review of the documentation indicated that although the school district
has written procedures for the suspension of students with special needs, the procedures do not meet
state and federal requirements. The procedures do not address suspensions up to and after 10 days,
and do not include procedural safeguards for students with disabilities prior to any suspension beyond
10 consecutive days or more than 10 cumulative days (if there is a pattern of suspension) in any school
year.
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: All special needs students will have a special education
representative present during disciplinary meeting with Principal/Dean of Students. Record of
suspension will be submitted to Student Services for tracking purposes and to ensure that if student has
been suspended for 10 or more consecutive or cumulative days, the Team will meet to determine if
further services are required. Records of suspension will also be tracked in the electronic student
management system x2.
12
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Implementation: Matthew Ricard, Dean of
Corrective Action Activity: August 2010
Students
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Updated Procedure Manual for Dean of Students
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: Information will be tracked electronically in
student management system x2
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: SE 45 Procedures for
suspension up to 10 days and after 10
days: General requirements
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Partially Approved
Disapproved
Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval:
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): Submit evidence that all appropriate school personnel
have received training on the revised written procedures for suspensions up to 10 days and after 10
days, procedures for suspensions of students with disabilities when suspensions exceed 10 consecutive
school days or a pattern has developed for suspensions exceeding 10 cumulative days, and procedural
requirements that apply to students not yet determined to be eligible for special education. Please
include the title/role of staff attending with a signed attendance form, the agenda indicating that this
information has been reviewed and the name and title of the presenter, by February 21, 2011.
Progress Report Due Date(s): February 21, 2011
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: SE 46 Procedures for suspension
of students with disabilities when suspensions exceed
10 consecutive school days or a pattern has
developed for suspensions exceeding 10 cumulative
days; responsibilities of the Team; responsibilities of
the district
Department CPR Finding: See SE 45
13
Rating: Partially Implemented
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: Discipline removal for current misconduct is for less
than 10 consecutive school days but removals total more than 10 school days in the
school year
 Is the current removal one in a series that is a pattern of removal
constituting a change of placement?
o
NO – The Team will communicate with all of student’s instructors
to guarantee that student is able to continue to participate in the
general curriculum in another setting and continue to progress
toward meeting IEP goals
YES – parents will be notified and the Team will set up FAPE
services to meet the needs of the student. Within 10 school days
of the decision to remove student, the Team must meet to review
all information and make a manifestation determination. Conduct
reviewed to determine whether or not conduct is a direct result of
student’s disability and action taken following IDEA 2004
guidelines
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Implementation: Matthew Ricard, Dean of
Corrective Action Activity: August 2010
Students
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Updated Procedure Manual for Dean of Students
o
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: Information will be tracked electronically in
student management system x2 and e-mail correspondence between special education and instructors to
keep students progressing toward IEP goals
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: SE 46 Procedures for
suspension of students with
disabilities when suspensions exceed
10 consecutive school days or a
pattern has developed for suspensions
exceeding 10 cumulative days;
responsibilities of the Team;
responsibilities of the district
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Partially Approved
Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval:
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): See SE 45
Progress Report Due Date(s): See SE 45
14
Disapproved
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: SE 47 Procedural requirements
applied to students not yet determined to be eligible
for special education
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: A review of the documentation and interviews indicated that the school
does not have procedural requirements that apply to students not yet determined to be eligible for
special education.
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: If student is in the process of being recommended for
or evaluated for special education services then all disciplinary action will be conducted with a
representative present. Special Education Department to regularly inform Dean of Students of any
recommendations or requests that are submitted for students who are not currently special education
students. Record of suspension will be submitted to Student Services for tracking purposes and to
ensure that if student has been suspended for 10 or more consecutive or cumulative days, the Team will
meet to determine if further services are required. Records of suspension will also be tracked in the
electronic student management system x2.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Implementation: Matthew Ricard, Dean of
Corrective Action Activity: August 2010
Students & Melissa LeRay, Director of Special
Education
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Updated Procedure Manual for Dean of Students
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: E-mail correspondence from Special Education to
Dean of Students Office when a student is in the recommendation or referral process
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: SE 47 Procedural
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Partially Approved
requirements applied to students not
yet determined to be eligible for
special education
Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval:
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): See SE 45
Progress Report Due Date(s): See SE 45
15
Disapproved
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
District: Nashoba Valley Technical High School
Corrective Action Plan Forms
Program Area: Civil Rights
Prepared by: Jobee O’Sullivan (Coordinator of Guidance & Admissions), Matthew Ricard
(Dean of Students), & Gabriella White (Academic/Testing Coordinator)
CAP Form will expand to as many lines as necessary. Before completing and emailing to
pqacap@doe.mass.edu, please see separate Instructions for Completing Corrective Action Plans.
All corrective action must be fully implemented and all noncompliance corrected as soon as
possible and no later than one year from the issuance of the Coordinated Program Review Final
Report to the school or district.
Mandatory One-Year Compliance Date: September 26, 2011
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: CR 14 Counseling and
counseling materials free from bias and stereotypes
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: A review of the documentation and interviews indicated that the district
does not ensure that counseling and counseling materials are free from bias and stereotypes on the
basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, and homelessness.
Counselors do not examine testing materials for bias and counteract any found bias when
administering tests and interpreting test results.
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: During the summer of 2010 all counseling and
testing materials were reviewed utilizing the approved forms for the Curriculum Review
Procedure. Moving forward all counseling materials have been added to the Nashoba Valley
Technical High School curriculum review procedure which is a formalized process, utilizing
the Textbook, Curriculum, and Counseling Materials Evaluation Instrument, to ensure its
counseling materials, testing, and activities do not discriminate on the basis of race, color,
national origin, sex, or disability
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Implementation: Jobee O’Sullivan,
Admissions/Guidance Coordinator
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Corrective Action Activity: 8/ 31/10; annually
reviewed thereafter on a 4-year cycle scheduled
by grade level
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Curriculum Review Procedure, and Textbook,
Curriculum and Counseling Materials Evaluation Instrument (see attached CR-14).
16
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: The Principal will submit and present an annual
report of findings of the Curriculum Review Procedure, including counseling and testing
materials, to the School Committee Curriculum Sub-Committee for approval.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: CR 14 Counseling and
counseling materials free from bias
and stereotypes
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Partially Approved
Disapproved
Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval:
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): Please submit sample copies of the Guidance, Admissions
and Counseling Evaluation Instrument completed by staff, by April 25, 2011.
Progress Report Due Date(s): April 25, 2011
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: CR 16 Notice to students 16 or
over leaving school without a high school diploma,
certificate of attainment, or certificate of completion
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: A review of the documentation and interviews indicated that within ten
days from a student's fifteenth consecutive unexcused absence, the district does not provide written
notice to students age 16 or over leaving school without a high school diploma, certificate of
attainment or certificate of completion, that states that the student and parent or guardian may meet
with a representative of the district within ten days from the date the notice was sent. At the request of
the parent or guardian, the district may consent to an extension of time for the meeting of not longer
than 14 days.
In addition, the district is not sending written notice to former students who have not yet earned
the competency determination and who have not transferred to another school to inform them of the
availability of publicly funded post-high school academic support programs and to encourage them to
participate in those programs.
17
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: Within ten days from a student’s fifteenth
consecutive unexcused absence, the district provides written notice to students age 16 or over
leaving school without a high school diploma, certificate of attainment or certificate of
completion, that states that the student and parent or guardian may meet with a representative
of the district within ten days from the date the notice was sent. At the request of the parent or
guardian, the district may consent to an extension of time for the meeting of not longer than 14
days.
The Academic/Testing Coordinator is responsible for overseeing the 632 Academic
Achievement grant. As part of this grant program, the Academic/Testing Coordinator sends
letters to the members of previous graduating classes who have not yet earned their
competency determination and therefore not received their diplomas. This letter is sent out
twice a year before each retest opportunity. The letter indicates that tutoring programs are
available to assist students in earning the necessary score, informs them of the dates of the
retest, and provides them with contact information for the Academic/Testing Coordinator.
Files are kept in the Principal’s office on each of these students and copies of these letters are
annually placed in the students’ MCAS file. Currently, Nashoba Valley Technical School has
seven students from the class of 2003 who need to participate in the English and Math testing,
and two students from the class of 2006 who need to participate in math only.
The procedure manual for the Academic/Testing Coordinator outlines this procedure under the
section “MCAS retest”. The manual has been updated to include this information under the
632 grant section as well.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Implementation: Gabriella White,
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Corrective Action Activity: The MCAS
Academic/Testing Coordinator & Matthew
Ricard, Dean of Students
letter is sent out twice a year, in September
and January. A description of this
procedure is already outlined in the
procedure manual for the Academic/Testing
Coordinator.
The absent 15 days letter is in place.
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Copies of each MCAS letter sent out have
been placed in the MCAS files in the Principal’s office for each student.
A copy of the 15 day absence letter is attached (CR 16)
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: The Principal will be responsible for
maintaining the files of the MCAS letters and ensuring that the letter is filed.
The Dean of Students will be responsible for ensuring that the 15 day absence letter was sent.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: CR 16 Notice to students
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Partially Approved
16 or over leaving school without a
high school diploma, certificate of
attainment, or certificate of
completion
Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval:
Disapproved
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): The district submitted copies of both letters being sent to
students, as well as verification that it has sent out annual notice to former students who have not yet
18
earned their competency determination and who have not transferred to another school.
Please submit sample copies of any notices that have been sent to any students having fifteen
consecutive unexcused absences, by April 25, 2011.
Progress Report Due Date(s): April 25, 2011
19
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
District: Nashoba Valley Technical High School
Corrective Action Plan Forms
Program Area: Career/Vocational Technical Education
Prepared by: Carol Heidenrich (Director of Technology), Paul Jussaume (Coordinator of
Vocational Technical Programs and Co-op), Jobee O’Sullivan (Coordinator of Guidance &
Admissions), Denise Pigeon (Principal), Matthew Ricard (Dean of Students), and Gabriella
White (Coordinator of Academic & Testing Programs)
CAP Form will expand to as many lines as necessary. Before completing and emailing to
pqacap@doe.mass.edu, please see separate Instructions for Completing Corrective Action Plans.
All corrective action must be fully implemented and all noncompliance corrected as soon as
possible and no later than one year from the issuance of the Coordinated Program Review Final
Report to the school or district.
Mandatory One-Year Compliance Date: September 26, 2011
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: CVTE 9
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: The district’s General Advisory Committee and several Program Advisory
Committees do not have the composition as required by the MA Vocational Technical Education Regulations
603 CMR 4.03 (1) 2. 4.03 (1) 1., respectively. The specifics are as follows:
The General Advisory Committee does not meet twice per year nor does it include at least one person with a
disability, racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit persons with a disability, and racial and
linguistic minorities.
The Program Advisory Committee for Automotive Collision Repair and Refinishing does not include at least
one person with a disability, racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit persons with disabilities, and
racial and linguistic minorities. It does not include organized postsecondary education (college) and student
representation, as required. Note: Districts may meet the organized labor representation on their school’s
Program Advisory Committees by including organized labor representation on the General Advisory
Committee in lieu of each Program Advisory Committee.
The Program Advisory Committee for Automotive Technology does not include at least one female, person
with a disability, racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit females, persons with disabilities, and
racial and linguistic minorities. It does not include postsecondary education (college) and student
representation, as required. See Note under Automotive Collision Repair and Refinishing regarding meeting
the requirement for organized labor representation.
20
The Program Advisory Committee for Carpentry does not include at least one person with a disability and
racial minorities or a plan to recruit persons with disabilities, and racial minorities. It does not include
postsecondary education (college) and apprenticeship representation, as required.
The Program Advisory Committee for Cosmetology does not include at least one person with a disability,
racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit persons with disabilities, and racial and linguistic
minorities. It does not include organized labor representation, as required. See Note under Automotive
Collision Repair and Refinishing regarding meeting the requirement for organized labor representation.
The Program Advisory Committee for Culinary Arts does not include at least one person with a disability or
a plan to recruit persons with disabilities. It does not include organized labor, postsecondary education
(college) student and apprenticeship representation, as required. See Note under Automotive Collision
Repair and Refinishing regarding meeting the requirement for organized labor representation.
The Program Advisory Committee for Dental Assisting does not include at least one person with a disability,
racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit persons with disabilities and racial and linguistic
minorities.
The Program Advisory Committee for Design & Visual Communications does not include at least one person
with a disability, racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit persons with disabilities, and racial and
linguistic minorities. It does not include postsecondary education (college) representation, as required.
The Program Advisory Committee for Early Education and Care does not include at least one person with a
disability, racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit persons with disabilities, and racial and
linguistic minorities.
The Program Advisory Committee for Electricity does not include at least one female, person with a
disability, racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit females, persons with disabilities, and racial
and linguistic minorities. It does not include postsecondary education (college) student and apprenticeship
representation, as required.
21
The Program Advisory Committee for Electronics does not include at least one person with a disability,
racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit persons with disabilities and racial and linguistic
minorities.
The Program Advisory Committee for Engineering Technology does not include at least one person with a
disability, racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit persons with disabilities, and racial and
linguistic minorities.
The Program Advisory Committee for Health Assisting does not include at least one person with a disability,
racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit persons with disabilities, and racial and linguistic
minorities. It does not include organized labor representation, as required. See Note under Automotive
Collision Repair and Refinishing regarding meeting the requirement for organized labor representation.
The Program Advisory Committee for Hospitality Management does not include at least one person with a
disability, racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit persons with disabilities, and racial and
linguistic minorities. It does not include organized labor, registered apprenticeship programs,
parents/guardians and postsecondary education (college) representation, as required. See Note under
Automotive Collision Repair and Refinishing regarding meeting the requirement for organized labor
representation.
The Program Advisory Committee for Machine Tool Technology does not include at least one female, person
with a disability, racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit females, persons with disabilities, and
racial and linguistic minorities. It does not include organized labor, registered apprenticeship programs and
postsecondary education (college) representation, as required. See Note under Automotive Collision Repair
and Refinishing regarding meeting the requirement for organized labor representation.
The Program Advisory Committee for Marketing does not include at least one person with a disability, racial
and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit persons with disabilities, and racial and linguistic minorities. It
does not include postsecondary education (college) representation, as required.
The Program Advisory Committee for Plumbing does not include at least one female, one person with a
disability, racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit females, persons with disabilities, and racial
and linguistic minorities. It does not include organized labor, registered apprenticeship programs,
postsecondary education (college) representation and parent/guardian representation, as required. See Note
under Automotive Collision Repair and Refinishing regarding meeting the requirement for organized labor
representation.
The Program Advisory Committee for Programming & Web Development does not include at least one
person with a disability, racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit persons with disabilities, and
racial and linguistic minorities. It does not include student representation, as required.
The Program Advisory Committee for Radio & Television Broadcasting does not include at least one female,
person with a disability, racial and linguistic minorities or a plan to recruit females, persons with
disabilities, and racial and linguistic minorities.
22
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: This fall all technical instructors reviewed membership for
compliance with membership requirements. Technical instructors recruited this fall and made numerous
additions to the Program Advisory Committees. Please see attached narrative of updates by technical
program and copies of updated rosters and recruitment information for each technical program. As of this
update all programs meet the required membership with the exception of Automotive Collision Repair and
Refinishing, Automotive Technology, Electrical Technology and Plumbing and Heating. These programs are
missing post secondary representation. Phase I employee evaluations of technical teachers will include a
criteria regarding success in meeting membership requirements and the documentation of recruitment efforts.
In addition, these instructors have been given a December 15, 2010 deadline for developing and mailing
recruitment letters to potential postsecondary members.
A Program Advisory Committee Recruitment Plan was developed to fulfill the recommendations noted in
CVTE 9. See attached.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Implementation: Carol Heidenrich (Director of
Expected Date of Completion for Each Corrective
Action Activity: Revised plan on October 19, 2010
Technology), Paul Jussaume (Coordinator of
Vocational Technical Programs and Co-op),
and Matthew Ricard (Dean of Students)
December 15, 2010
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Attached copy of plan and recent meeting agendas:
CVTE-9
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: Plan for recruitment of advisory members will be
implemented through the employee evaluation system for technical program instructors and administrators
requiring the meeting of the goal to comply with the Advisory Committee Recruitment Plan.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: CVTE 9
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): None required. Action already taken is sufficient.
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: CVTE 10
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: There is a one page “checklist” of assessment scores, goals, extra
curricular activities and awards that is completed for each student and provided to parents
but there is no evidence of the development of a career plan, i.e., “a comprehensive, formal
written plan that relates learning to career goals; is based on both formal and informal
assessment; includes areas in which a student needs to increase knowledge and skills to reach
the documented goals; and is designed to facilitate transition from high school to future
learning and employment.”
23
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: To ensure that Nashoba Valley RTSD assists each
student enrolled in a career/vocational technical education programs in the development of a career
plan we have already taken several steps and plan to implement the following:
The district guidance coordinator has contacted the Upper Cape Cod Tech Admissions/Guidance
Coordinator for initial technical assistance around Career Planning and Career Testing software used
(CareerScope). We have also contacted Vocational Research Institute to obtain product, pricing and to
request a demonstration of CareerScope to determine feasibility and usability. We want to create and
convene a team (comprised of students, guidance, CTE Coordinator, and Cluster Chairpersons) to
evaluate Upper Cape’s Career Plan and Testing Software then adapt their timeline of administration to
fit our trimester system This creates buy-in an ownership with students and faculty. Ultimately, our
goal is to design a new career plan instrument before the end of the school year and incorporate this
into technical area portfolios. We want to visit Upper Cape Tech to observe administration of the
career plan, attend MASCA workshops pertaining to career planning, and discuss the plan at facultywide meetings.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Corrective Action Activity: Submit first draft
Implementation: Jobee O’Sullivan,
of plan to DESE in May 2011; target of piloting
Admissions/Guidance Coordinator
with specific technical programs in June 2011;
kick-off for full implementation in September
2011
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Will submit meeting agendas, meeting minutes,
timeline of implementation, and a draft career plan.
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: Develop a meeting schedule with specific agenda
items that will include goals and timelines for completion. Agenda items and action items will be
reflected in meeting minutes.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: CVTE 10
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): None required. Action already taken is sufficient.
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: CVTE 17
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: The following career/vocational technical education programs
have no articulation agreements with postsecondary education or registered apprenticeship
programs: Cosmetology, Early Education and Care, Electricity and Health Assisting, and
Plumbing. The following programs have articulation agreements with out-of-state
postsecondary institutions and private career colleges, but none with Massachusetts
community colleges: Auto Technology, Auto Collision Repair and Refinishing, Carpentry,
Hospitality Management, and Machine Tool Technology.
24
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: Statewide articulation agreements have been secured
between the Carpentry program and Construction Craft Laborers Apprenticeship Program, Boston
Carpenters Apprenticeship & Training Fund, and Eastern Massachusetts Carpenters Apprenticeship &
Training Committee. An articulation agreement between Middlesex Community College and Nashoba
Valley Technical High School Early Education and Care program was approved on 6/21/10. To
ensure that Nashoba Valley RTSD strengthen our relationship with the Career Technical Education
Consortium and increase the number of articulation agreements to at least one articulation for each
technical program, we have already taken several steps and intend to do the following: Concerted
efforts will be made to attend at least two advisory meetings per year off-site or offer to host them onsite. We will also be conducting a gap analysis whereby we look at our eighteen technical programs
and corresponding current articulation agreements, then look at our local community college options
(Middlesex Community College) to identify post-secondary options our students could pursue with
credits upon entry. On 11/17/10, a meeting was held on-site between guidance personnel and
representatives from Middlesex Community College (Kim Burns and Lauren Ellis). We obtained the
dates for the two remaining scheduled advisory meetings, discussed the limitations within our schedule
for leaving the building on certain days/during peak times of the year, and posed the possibility of
rotating meeting sites among the area participating schools for the 2011-2012 school year. We asked
MCC to provide us with the past 5 years of data for our graduates to determine which programs they
pursued as well as articulation credits awarded. With that data, we will identify which programs
underutilize articulation agreements and why, which programs need articulation agreements, and set a
priority timeline for which programs to focus on first.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Corrective Action Activity: submit a plan to
Implementation: Jobee O’Sullivan,
address linkages and articulation agreements to
Admissions/Guidance Coordinator
DESE in April 2011
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Early Education & Care Articulation with
Middlesex Community College and articulations for Carpentry with Construction Craft Laborers
Apprenticeship Program, Boston Carpenters Apprenticeship & Training Fund, and Eastern
Massachusetts Carpenters Apprenticeship & Training Committee (previously submitted). Will submit
meeting agendas, meeting minutes, timeline of implementation and draft plan.
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: Develop a calendar of existing articulations and
associated renewal dates; Develop a meeting schedule with specific agenda items that will include
goals and timelines for completion. Agenda items and action items will be reflected in meeting
minutes.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: CVTE 17
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): None required. Action already taken is sufficient.
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: CVTE 20
Rating: Partially Implemented
25
Department CPR Finding: There is no evidence that unpaid off-campus construction and
maintenance projects are appropriately implemented. The district does not have a written policy or
documented procedures regarding student eligibility, onsite supervision, liability and insurance
coverage, or compliance with OSHA regulations during unpaid off-campus construction and
maintenance projects.
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: A Community Service Project Recruitment and
Implementation Plan was developed to fulfill the recommendations noted in CVTE 20
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Corrective Action Activity: Implemented
Implementation: Paul Jussaume (Coordinator
of Vocational Technical Programs and Co-op)
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Attached copy of plan: Community Service
Project Recruitment and Implementation
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: Plan will be implemented through the employee
evaluation system for technical program instructors and administrators requiring the meeting of the
goal to comply with the Community Service Project Recruitment and Implementation Plan.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: CVTE 20
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): None required. Action already taken is sufficient.
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: CVTE 31
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: A safety expert from the Division of Occupational Safety (DOS) inspected
the school facilities and shop equipment. The Office for Career/Vocational Technical Education sent
the Safety Survey Report on the inspections to Superintendent Klimkiewicz on May 11, 2010.
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: All identified safety hazards have been corrected as
indicated in the letter dated August 31, 2010 from David Edmonds.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Corrective Action Activity: Completed –
Implementation: Paul Jussaume (Coordinator
certified August 31, 2010
of Vocational Technical Programs and Co-op)
and George Kalarites (Facilities Manager)
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Please see attachment labeled CVTE 31.
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: The Coordinator of Vocational Technical
Programs and Co-op and the Facilities Manager will work together to ensure compliance.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: CVTE 31
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): None required. Action already taken is sufficient.
26
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: CVTE 32
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: See CVTE 31
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: All identified safety hazards have been corrected as
indicated in the letter dated August 31, 2010 from David Edmonds.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Corrective Action Activity: Completed –
Implementation: Paul Jussaume (Coordinator
certified August 31, 2010
of Vocational Technical Programs and Co-op)
and George Kalarites (Facilities Manager)
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Please see attachment labeled CVTE 32.
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: The Coordinator of Vocational Technical
Programs and Co-op and the Facilities Manager will work together to ensure compliance.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: CVTE 32
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): None required. Action already taken is sufficient.
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: CVTE 33
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: Reviewers found that the district’s performance was as follows:
For Perkins Performance Year 2 (2008-2009), the district did not meet at least 90% of the performance
level for populations with 16 or more students for the following core indicators:
1S1 - Academic Attainment English Language Arts Core Indicator (required = 46.25%):
Total –actual 41.59%
Male - actual 38.67%
Student with disabilities - actual = 13.67%
Economically disadvantaged - actual 29.03%
1S2 - Academic Attainment Mathematics Core Indicator (required = 41.06%):
Student with disabilities - actual = 13.64%
6S2 – Nontraditional Completion Core Indicator (required =7.41%):
Economically disadvantaged - actual 29.03%
For the Class of 2008 (the most recent data available at the time of the report), the district did not meet
the required performance level for positive placement under Chapter 74 in the following Chapter 74approved vocational technical education programs: Office Technology-66.67%.
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: Nashoba Valley Technical High School is working to
27
improve Perkins Performance in all areas that did not meet at least 90% of the performance level for
populations with 16 or more students for the following core indicator including 1S1 Academic
Attainment in English Language Arts for the total population and males, 1S2Academc Attainment in
Mathematics for students with disabilities and 6S2 Nontraditional Completion for economically
disadvantaged students. Nashoba Valley Technical High School has an approved Perkins Improvement
Plan for each of these core indicators. The plan specifically describes activities in process to address
the deficiencies. Please see the attached approved Perkins Local Improvement Plan (Attachment CVTE
33-A).
Also noted in the report for the Class of 2008 (the most recent data available at the time of the report),
the district did not meet the required performance level for positive placement under Chapter 74 in the
Office Technology Program-66.67%. Please note that the Office Technology Program no longer exists.
This program was converted to Programming and Web Development due to the labor market demands
and low placement rates for Office Technology.
The data from 2008-2009 (class of 2009) did indicate that the district did not meet the Core
Indicators for English Language Arts in the aggregate and for the following subgroups: males,
students with disabilities, and economically disadvantaged. It also indicated that the district
failed to meet the requirements for students with disabilities in math. However, more recent
data, as indicated by the following chart, reveals that we have since met all of the Core
Indicators for English Language Arts and have made improvement in math for special
education students.
English Language Arts
Percent of Class Scoring Proficient/Advanced
Special
Economically
Aggregate
Male
Education
Disadvantaged
2010
62
60
35
2011
67
62
59
2012
69
66
50
31
67
60
Mathematics
Special
Education
2010
2011
2012
37
50
39
To ensure that Nashoba Valley Technical School continues to see improvements in all students
we have implemented several programs to identify and address student strengths and
weaknesses. These programs are outlined below:
1. Math Placement Exam: All incoming students in grade 9, as well as new students in grades
10-12, participate in the Stanford 10 Achievement Test for Mathematics and Reading. This
28
data is used to identify areas of academic need, partially identify students for the Title I
program, and to assist in documenting improvement. Beginning in May 2010, incoming 9th
grade students also participated in an internally developed placement exam. The purpose of
this exam was twofold. The exam provided additionally information to teachers on strengths
and weaknesses, and helped ensure that students were placed in the appropriate mathematics
class for their ability level and experience.
2. Tutoring: A mandatory tutoring program for grade 10 students who scored below 240 on
their grade 8 MCAS tests in English and Mathematics. This program will be expanded in
January to include grade 9 students as well. We have restructured our schedule to ensure that
our strongest teachers are working with the students who are struggling. An afterschool
tutoring program will begin this winter to further address the needs of low achieving students.
Finally, an MCAS information night is planned for this winter to educate parents not only on
the exam, but on how they can best help their children.
3. Directed Study: Beginning in September, 2009 Nashoba Valley Technical School
implemented a Pyramid of Intervention and Directed Study Program. According to the
Pyramid of Intervention, teachers identify students who are struggling with course work.
Teachers intervene to assist students by keeping students afterschool for extra help on
Tuesdays and Thursdays, contacting parents, providing additional support in class, utilizing
teacher websites to further disseminate information and other actions which would assist the
student in understanding and completion of coursework. If these actions fail, students are then
referred to the directed study program according to the school’s pyramid of intervention.
Students are assigned to a special education teacher. They report to this teacher on a specified
period during their technical week to make up assignments and receive additional assistance.
All students can be assigned to directed study, not only special education students. The
directed study teacher documents work reviewed and completed during the directed study
period and reports to the Director of Special Education, who oversees the directed study
program, and the student’s classroom teacher.
4. Embedded Academics: To further provide academic support to students within the realm of
their technical programs, Nashoba Valley Technical school began an embedded academics
program in September, 2009. Since then the program has changed and evolved to best suit the
needs of our students and teachers. Academic teachers are assigned to technical programs one
period per day to work with students on academic skills in the technical area. Academic and
technical teachers work together to teach academic skills necessary for both academic and
technical success. In September, 2010, each technical program has designed an exemplary
English and Math lesson specific to their discipline. All grade 9 students participate in this
lesson as part of their exploratory rotations.
5. Professional Development Plan: To assist our teachers in meeting the needs of our students
we have contracted with an English, and a Math/Special Education coach. Professional
development for the 2010-2011 school year has been designed around working with these
coaches to improve overall instruction and improve the achievement of special education
students. The coaches design and participate in extended professional development days, a
three day professional development in August, as well as cluster chair and faculty meetings.
29
6. Test Wiz and X2: All student assessments are loaded into the X2 software. This allows
teachers to reference student performance on a variety of standardized tests from the Stanford
10 and MCAS exams to PSAT, Accuplacer and practice test results. Teachers can chart
student achievement over time and see trends in test scores. Additionally, teachers have
access to www.testwiz.net. Nashoba Valley Technical School utilizes test wiz in conjunction
with their software add on, Test Scan. This allows teachers to create standards based answer
sheets consisting of both objective and open response questions. Teachers can then score their
answers and analyze their assessments according to standards, easily identifying the areas of
strength and weakness for each student. Teachers then meet during common planning time to
discuss the results of their common assessments and where/what they need to do improve
student achievement.
7. Lesson Plan Template: The school wide lesson plan template was revised in January 2009
to include a section to address students who are not meeting classroom standards. This section
states: “Collaboratively develop a written plan for responding to students who are not learning
during this weekly plan/unit.” Teachers identify strategies for intervention as well as
accommodations for special education students in this section weekly.
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Implementation: Denise Pigeon (Principal),
Gabriella White (Coordinator of Academic &
Testing Programs), Melissa LeRay (Director of
Special Education and English Language Learners),
and Paul Jussaume (Coordinator of Vocational
Technical Programs and Co-op)
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Corrective Action Activity:
1. Math Placement Exam: Completed in May
2010, ongoing implementation
2. Tutoring Program: Established in August,
2010, ongoing implementation. The winter
program is slated to begin 1/31/11 and conclude
5/11/11
3. Directed Study: Established in September,
2009, ongoing implementation
4. Embedded Academics: Established in
September, 2009, ongoing implementation
5. Professional Development Plan: See attached
dates of implementation
6. Test Wiz/X2: Established in September 2009,
ongoing implementation
7. Lesson Plan Template: Established in
January, 2009, ongoing implementation
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Evidence of performance of the class of 2009,
class of 2010 and class of 2011 indicates that progress has been made on improving performance
on the following:
1S1 - Academic Attainment English Language Arts Core Indicator (required = 46.25%):
Total –Class of 2009 and Class of 2010 met required performance level.
Male – Class of 2009and Class of 2010 met required performance level.
Student with disabilities – Class of 2009 and class of 2010 did not meet performance level but
preliminary data suggests that the Class of 2011 will meet performance levels.
Economically disadvantaged - Class of 2009 and class of 2010 did not meet performance level but
preliminary data suggests that the Class of 2011 will meet performance levels.
30
1S2 - Academic Attainment Mathematics Core Indicator (required = 41.06%):
Student with disabilities - Class of 2009 and class of 2010 did not meet performance level but
preliminary data suggests that the Class of 2011 will meet performance levels.
6S2 – Nontraditional Completion Core Indicator (required =7.41%):
Economically disadvantaged – Preliminary data indicates that the class of 2011 will meet performance
levels.
In addition, preliminary data indicates the class of 2009 indicates a 100% positive placement rate
for Office Technology.
The primary evidence of completion lies in successfully meeting the Core Indicators. Nashoba
Valley Technical School has already successfully met the Core Indicators for English for the
last three years. Work does need to be done to continually meet the Core Indicator for Special
Education Mathematics, and to ensure continual improvement of all students in all subject
areas. Evidence of completion specific to each proposed activities is outlined below:
1. Math Placement Test:
 Placement Exam (Attachment 1)
 Sample of Student Data Report (Attachment 2)
2. Tutoring Program:
 Sample Student Schedule -School Day Tutoring and Tutoring Program Memorandum
(Attachment 3)
 Sample Progress Report Form - School Day Tutoring (Attachment 4)
 Roster of Students (After School Tutoring Program to be submitted in May)
 Sample Pre/Post Test Data (After School Tutoring program to be submitted in May)
3. Directed Study:
 Classroom Teacher Referral Form/Directed Study Teacher Progress Report
(Attachment 5)
 Pyramid of Intervention (Attachment 6)
4. Embedded Academics:
 Supervisor Walk Through Report Form (Attachment 7)
 Academic Teacher Logs (Attachment 8)
 Sample Embedded Academics Lesson (Attachment 9)
5. Professional Development Plan:
 Agenda from Summer Three Day Professional Development (Attachment 10)
 Sample Agenda from School Year Professional Development Half Days (Attachment 11)
 Sample Agenda from Cluster Chair Meetings (Attachment 12)
 Sample Agenda from Faulty Meetings (to be submitted in May)
 Sample Minutes from Cluster Chair Meeting (Attachment 13)
 Sample Academic Coach Observation Report (Attachment 14)
 Calendar of Professional Development Activities (to be submitted in May)
6. Testwiz/X2:
31



Sample Teacher Usage Report (Attachment 15)
Sample Student Data from X2(Attachment 16)
Sample Student Report from Testwiz (Attachment 17)
7. Lesson Plan Template:
 Sample Completed Lesson Plan Template (Attachment 18)
 Sample Supervisor Log of Submitted Templates (Attachment 19)
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: All staff members responsible for the
development of the Perkins Local Improvement Plan meet monthly to review and discuss
progress on implementing the activities as outlined. In addition, the Coordinator of Academic &
Testing Programs regularly monitors progress on all Perkins Core Indicators by class and shares
the data at monthly cluster chair meetings for discussion and review (Attachment CVTE 33-2)
1. Math Placement Exam: The test was reviewed by the Mathematics cluster in September,
2010 by the mathematics cluster. It was determined that the addition of open response
questions was necessary. With the approval of the Academic/Testing Coordinator, the revised
test was used as a pre-test for grade 9 in October, 2010. Grade 9 students will then take the
test in January and June to determine student improvement. The revised test will be used in
May, 2011 to test the incoming class of 2015. The Academic/Testing Coordinator, the
Director of Special Education/ELL and the Coordinator of Guidance and Admissions reviewed
the testing data to make the appropriate course selections.
2. Tutoring Program: All instructors participating in the tutoring program are required to
maintain a record of contact. This record must include attendance and progress reports,
descriptions of activities, and assessment information. The Coordinator of Academic &
Testing Programs will review these reports monthly to ensure compliance. Additionally, the
Coordinator of Academic & Testing Programs will organize and oversee pre/post testing of
students in English Language Arts and Mathematics. Data from these tests will be analyzed
and disseminated to instructors to further assist them in meeting the needs of their assigned
students. Additionally, each instructor was provided with a data binder for all students under
their tutelage. Instructors are expected to maintain a weakly progress report as part of this
binder to document topics taught and improvements gained. These binders will be submitted
to the Academic/Testing Coordinator at the end of each term for review.
3. Directed Study: Classroom teachers refer student utilizing the Directed Study Referral
Form. Directed Study teachers report to the Director of Special Education/ELL and the
classroom teacher on skills, topics and coursework completed during the directed study period.
The Directed Study Referral form contains a section for reporting back to document work
accomplished. Students who are not progressing during the directed study period will be
referred to the Director of Special Education/ELL for the next step on the pyramid of
intervention.
4. Embedded Academics: Academic and Technical supervisors monitor the implantation of
the embedded academics program. Teachers have been assigned specific periods for
embedded academics and supervisors will conduct walk-throughs as part of the teacher
evaluation process to document implementation. Academic teachers will also maintain logs of
32
contact which will be submitted to supervisors for review. Professional development
opportunities will also be utilized for planning of embedded academics lessons. Lessons will
be submitted to supervisors for review.
5. Professional Development Plan: Coaches provide written reviews of work accomplished
with individual teachers and departments as a whole to the Principal and Academic/Testing
Coordinator. The Academic/Testing Coordinator will review these reports and utilize them
with classroom teacher as necessary. Professional Development projects will be reviewed and
kept on file by the Academic/Testing Coordinator and the Principal to determine appropriate
compliance and improvement. Agendas and minutes will be reviewed and disseminated in a
timely fashion to appropriate personnel.
6. Testwiz/X2: Academic/Testing Coordinator will review teacher usage of testwiz.net
software as well as data generated by standardized testing, and will provide opportunities to
train teachers in the use of testwiz.net analysis software. Academic/Testing Coordinator will
review agendas for department meetings and assist departments in analyzing data.
7. Lesson Plan Template: Lesson plans will be developed collectively as a department
utilizing assessment data. Lesson plans will then be submitted to supervisors the Wednesday
preceding implantation. Supervisors will review these plans and provide feedback as
appropriate. Lesson plans will then be filed electronically. A hardcopy of academic lessons
will be kept in the Curriculum office. These plans will be reviewed in June to determine
appropriateness and revisions will be made accordingly.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: CVTE 33
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): None required. Action already taken is sufficient.
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: CVTE 37
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: Refer to CVTE 38
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: Per the direction of Charles McCarthy, Auditor for the
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education no corrective action was required.
However, he noted in the future the innovative expenditure for the seismology program in conjunction
with Boston College should not have been charged to the indirect costs line rather an amendment
should have been filed. Please review the attached letter from Charles McCarthy regarding the fiscal
component of our CPR review (Attachment CVTE 37-1)
33
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Implementation: Denise Pigeon (Principal)
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Corrective Action Activity: Completed June
10, 2010
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: The fiscal year 2011 grant does not include any
expenditure for indirect costs. In addition, the innovative seismology program in conjunction with
Boston College is now funded with non-Perkins funds.
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: Quarterly meetings are held with the Principal,
Business manager and Superintendent to review all expenditures for the Perkins grant and to discuss
potential amendments as needed.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: CVTE 37
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): None required. Action already taken is sufficient.
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
(To be completed by school district/charter school)
Criterion & Topic: CVTE 38
Rating: Partially Implemented
Department CPR Finding: Selected line expenditures per the district’s general ledger were traced to
supporting documentation. The sample of expenditures traced was determined to be program related
approved per budget narrative, and the goods or services were received as billed with one (1)
exception. The school billed and was reimbursed a total of $8,000 under the grant budget line item
Indirect Costs. The amount billed represented approximately seven (7) percent of the total grant
amount that was contrary to the requirements of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education
Improvement Act of 2006 that caps administrative costs at 5%. This resulted in an excess of
approximately $1,492. Additionally the expenses billed were not for administrative costs as billed;
rather the funds were used to fund an innovative program of Seismology in conjunction with Boston
College.
Narrative Description of Corrective Action: Per the direction of Charles McCarthy, Auditor for the
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education no corrective action was required.
However, he noted in the future the innovative expenditure for the seismology program in conjunction
with Boston College should not have been charged to the indirect costs line rather an amendment
should have been filed. Please review the attached letter from Charles McCarthy regarding the fiscal
component of our CPR review (Attachment CVTE 37-1)
Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for
Expected Date of Completion for Each
Implementation: Denise Pigeon (Principal)
Corrective Action Activity: Completed June
10, 2010
Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: The fiscal year 2011 grant does not include any
expenditure for indirect costs. In addition, the innovative seismology program in conjunction with
Boston College is now funded with non-Perkins funds.
Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: Quarterly meetings are held with the Principal,
Business manager and Superintendent to review all expenditures for the Perkins grant and to discuss
potential amendments as needed.
34
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)
Criterion: CVTE 38
Status of Corrective Action:
Approved
Required Elements of Progress Report(s): None required. Action already taken is sufficient.
35