District: North Middlesex RSD Corrective Action Plan Forms Program Area: Special Education

MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION

COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW

District: North Middlesex RSD

Corrective Action Plan Forms

Program Area: Special Education

Prepared by: Linda M. Rakiey, Director of Special Education

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: December 1, 2011


CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN

(To be completed by school district/charter school)

Criterion & Topic: SE 2 Rating: Partially Implemented

Required and optional assessments

Department CPR Finding: Review of student records indicated that an e ducational assessment by a representative of the school district, including a history of the student’s educational progress in the general curriculum, is not consistently documented in the student record. Also, for students identified with significant health issues, a comprehensive health assessment by a physician that identifies medical problems is not consistently evident in the student record.

Narrative Description of Corrective Action:

1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing the mandated assessment processes and procedures.

2.

Specific attention will be given to required and optional assessments:



Review of requirements





Review of models of correctly completed forms

Practice with forms

3.

Revisit with liaisons, assistant principals and team chairs at monthly building meetings, providing technical assistance as needed.

4.

Oversight by team chair, assistant principals and clerical staff prior to the IEP being mailed.

5.

Random record review both internally and by consultants to assess accurate completion of criterion.

6.

Procedural checklist detailing partially implemented criterion will be submitted with all IEPs.

Checklist will be completed by Team Chairperson and monitored by clerical staff.

1

Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for

Implementation:

Linda Rakiey, Director of Special Education &

Kristin Campione, Assistant Director of Special

Education

Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action:



Agenda & Attendance Professional Development Session for Special Education Staff



Agenda & Attendance Professional Development Session for Building Administrators



Student records

Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures:



Special Education administrators will meet monthly with all Team Chairpersons. The agenda



Expected Date of Completion for Each

Corrective Action Activity:

1,2 - April, 2011

3,4 - May, June, September, October &

November 2011

5- June & November 2011

6 – May, 2011 will include review of IEP procedural checklists, review of timelines and discussion of best practice with regard to process and procedure.

Team Chairperson will continue to submit procedural checklist for each IEP. Clerical staff will monitor checklists.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION

(To be completed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education)

Criterion & Topic: SE 2

Required and optional

Status of Corrective Action:

Approved Partially Approved Disapproved assessments

Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval:

Department Order of Corrective Action:

Required Elements of Progress Report(s):

By June 30, 2011 , submit evidence that appropriate staff have been informed of the regulatory requirement regarding the conducting and documenting in student records of educational and health assessments. Staff notice should involve only those teachers, team chairs, and other staff responsible for completing educational assessments and for ensuring that the educational and health assessment results are placed in student records. Evidence may include but not be limited to a copy of email or written notification, the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials, and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By June 30, 2011 , submit the procedural checklist. Indicate the administrative staff responsible for ensuring that student records contain the required education and health assessment documentation.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted subsequent to staff notice, of student records from each building level (E, MS, HS) of students who had educational and health assessments conducted. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of student records reviewed from each level, the number of educational and health assessments in the student records found in compliance with requirements, the root causes for any remaining instances of non-compliance and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.

* Please note when conducting internal monitoring that district must maintain the following documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of the student names and grade level for the records reviewed; b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the review, their role(s), and signature(s).

2

Progress Report Due Date(s): June 30, 2011 & October 7, 2011





Specific Learning Disability

Rating: Partially Implemented

Department CPR Finding: Student records and interviews indicated that when a student is suspected of having a specific learning disability, the district does not consistently create a written determination using the most current form, the Specific Learning Disabilities Team Determination of Eligibility.


1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing the mandated processes and procedures for the Specific Learning Disabilities Team Determination of Eligibility (28M).

2.

Specific attention will be given to specific learning disability forms and their completion








Review of models of correctly completed ESPED version of 28M, SLD 1-4

Practice with forms

3.


4.

Oversight by team chair, assistant principals and clerical staff prior to team meetings to insure that the necessary forms are available at the team.

5.


6.


Checklist will be completed by Team Chairperson and monitored by clerical staff.


Implementation:



Education



1,2 - April, 2011


November 2011


6- May, 2011


The district will conduct and submit evidence of training on the use of SLD forms. The district will conduct a review of student records to ensure compliance.




Special Education administrators will meet monthly with all Team Chairpersons. The agenda will include review of IEP procedural checklists, review of timelines and discussion of best practice with regard to process and procedure.






The district will conduct reviews of student files for compliance.




Specific Learning Disability


Approved Partially Approved Disapproved

3




By June 30, 2011 , submit evidence of professional development on the mandated SLD forms and procedures for the Specific Learning Disabilities Team Determination of Eligibility for appropriate staff. Evidence may include but not be limited to the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By June 30, 2011 , submit the procedural checklist. Indicate the administrative staff responsible for ensuring that student records contain the required SLD information.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted subsequent to the professional development, for those records of students, from each building level (E, MS, HS), who were suspected of having a specific learning disability. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of student records reviewed from each level, the number of student records found in compliance with SLD requirements, the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.







Reports of assessment results

Department CPR Finding: Student record review and interviews indicated that not all reports of assessment results define in detail and in educationally relevant terms the student's needs, offering explicit means of meeting them. Further, it was noted that assessment summaries typically stated that recommendations would be discussed and made at the Team meeting


1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing the mandated assessment processes and procedures

2.

Specific attention will be given to assessment results and report writing:



Review of requirements (including summaries & recommendations)



Review of report exemplars and templates

3.

Revisit with school psychologists, related service providers, liaisons, assistant principals and team chairs at monthly building meetings. Additional meetings with the team chairs and school psychologists will be held monthly.

4.

Oversight by team chair, assistant principals and clerical staff prior to the IEP team meeting.

5.

Random record review both internally and by consultants to assess accurate completion of assessment reports.

4


Implementation:



Education



1,2 - April, 2011

3,4 - May, June, September, October and

November 2011

5- June and November 2011




Agenda & Attendance Professional Development Session for Special Educators



Agenda & Attendance Professional Development Session for Building Administrator



Assessment Report Template and Exemplars



Student Records




Special Education administrators will meet monthly with all Team Chairpersons. The agenda will include review of sample assessment reports.



Team Chairperson will continue to review assessment reports prior to providing them to parents and prior to the team meeting.




Reports of assessment results






By June 30, 2011 , submit evidence of training for all appropriate staff regarding assessment summaries and recommendations for team meetings. Evidence may include but not be limited to the dates of the training, the agenda, resource materials and a list of those in attendance, including names, signatures, titles and roles.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted subsequent to the training, of student records from each building level (E, MS, HS) of students who had assessments conducted. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of student records reviewed from each level, the number of assessment summaries and recommendations in student records found in compliance with requirements, the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.



5





Transition Services

Department CPR Finding: Review of student records, documentation and interviews indicated that the Team does not consistently discuss student transition needs for students 14 years and older. The

Transition Planning forms are not consistently being completed for these students, nor are they consistently contained in the student’s file with the IEP. For those students with a transition plan in place, records revealed that the Team does not always annually review and update the information on the Transition Planning form as appropriate.


1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing the mandated IEP processes and procedures

2.

Specific attention will be given to the transition process



Review of requirements (for initial and annual review of TPF)



Review of exemplars (TPF)



Practice with forms

3.

Revisit with liaisons, assistant principals, transition specialist, and team chairs at monthly building meetings, providing technical assistance as needed.

4.

Oversight by team chair, assistant principals, guidance department head, and clerical staff prior to the IEP (with TPF) being mailed.

5.


6.


Checklist will be completed by the Team Chairperson and monitored by clerical staff.


Implementation:



Education



1,2 - April, 2011

3,4 - May, June, September, October

&November 2011


6- May, 2011




Agenda & Attendance Professional Development Session for Special Education Staff (MS &

HS)



Agenda & Attendance Professional Development Session for Building Administrators (MS,

HS)



ESPED TPF records



Meeting Invitations



Student Records




Special Education administrators will meet monthly with all Team Chairpersons. The agenda will include review of IEP procedural checklists, review of timelines and discussion of best practice with regard to process and procedure for transition planning.




6




Transition Services






By June 30, 2011 , submit evidence that appropriate staff have been informed of the regulatory requirements related to the age at which to begin transition planning. Evidence may include but not be limited to a copy of email or written notification, the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials, and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By June 30, 2011 , submit the procedural checklist. Indicate the administrative staff responsible for ensuring that transition planning is occurring for each age-appropriate student annually and that transition plans contain all the required information.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted subsequent to staff notice of Transition Plans from the middle and high school level, for students who are age 14 or older. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the

Transition Plan review, the number of student records reviewed from each level, the number of

Transition Plans in records found in compliance with requirements, the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.







Age of Majority

Department CPR Finding: Student records, documentation and interviews indicated that the district informs the student of his or her right at age 18 to make all decisions in relation to special education programs and services. However, the district policy and practice has a student document their decision making preference and sign their IEP one year prior to attaining age 18.

7


1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing the mandated age of majority processes and procedures

2.

Specific attention will be given to timelines for documenting decisions and signing IEP’s








Review exemplars of “Age of Majority” forms

Practice with forms

3.

Revisit with liaisons, assistant principals and team chairs at monthly building meetings.

4.

Oversight by team chair, guidance department head, assistant principals and clerical staff prior to student reaching age of majority.

5.


6.

Provide liaisons and Team Chairpersons with eSped data (birthday list).


Implementation:



Education



1,2 - April, 2011

3,4 - May, June, September, October

&November 2011


6- April, 2011




Agenda & Attendance Professional Development Session for Special Education Staff Agenda

& Attendance Professional Development Session for Building Administrators



Completed eSped Age of Majority Forms



Student Records




Special Education administrators will meet monthly with all liaisons and Team Chairpersons.

The agenda will include review of the Age of Majority process and timelines and discussion of best practice with regard to process and procedure.




Age of Majority



Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: The internal monitoring procedures must include a review of student records to ensure ongoing compliance.

Department Order of Corrective Action: District administrator(s) will conduct an administrative review of student records to ensure that when a student reaches the age of majority, the district implements procedures to obtain consent

.


By June 30, 2011 , submit evidence that appropriate staff have been informed of the regulatory requirement regarding when the district must implement procedures to obtain consent upon when a student reaches the age of majority. Evidence may include but not be limited to a copy of email or written notification, the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials, and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By June 30, 2011 , submit a description of the internal oversight and tracking system for ensuring that the district has implemented procedures to obtain consent when the student has reached the age of 18.

Include the person(s) responsible for the oversight.

8

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted subsequent to staff notice, of students who reached the age of majority. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of students whose records indicated that the district implemented procedures to obtain consent upon the student turning 18, the number found in compliance with requirements and the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.







IEP Team composition

Department CPR Finding: Review of student records and interviews indicated that at annual review

Team meetings there is not always a representative of the school district with the authority to commit the resources of the district present. Additionally, when the district and parent agree that the member’s attendance is not necessary or the parent consents to the team member’s excusal, the parent’s agreement and consent is not documented in writing as required.


1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing the mandated requirements of team composition.

2.

Specific attention will be given to district personnel designated with the authority to commit district resources and the process for team member excusal:






Review of team member excusal form

3.

Revisit with liaisons, assistant principals and team chairs at monthly building meetings

4.

Oversight by team chair & assistant principals

5.


6.




Implementation:





1,2 - April, 2011


Education November 2011


6 – May, 2011










Student Records

9




Special Education administrators will meet monthly with all Team Chairpersons. The agenda will include review of team composition and member excusal and discussion of best practice with regard to process and procedure.




IEP Team composition






By June 30, 2011 , submit a list of staff (title, building level) who have the authority to commit district resources at annual Team meetings. Provide evidence that all appropriate staff have been informed 1.) regarding the excusal procedures to implement when a required Team member cannot attend a Team meeting, 2.) the regulatory requirements of having a district representative member who has the authority to commit district resources at annual Team meetings, and 3.) have been provided the list of district staff who have the authority to commit district resources.

Evidence may include but not be limited to a copy of email or written notification, the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials including the list of district staff with the authority to commit resources and a list of those in attendance, and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted subsequent to the training, of annual review team meeting attendance from all building levels. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of annual review team meeting Attendance Sheets (N3A) reviewed from each level, the number of meetings found in compliance with staff attendance requirements including a member with the authority to commit district resources, and the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted subsequent to staff notice, of required team meeting attendance from all building levels (E,

MS, HS) Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of team meeting Attendance Sheets (N3A) reviewed from each level, the number of meetings found in compliance with staff attendance requirements including the excusal process for those required team members not able to attend, and the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.



10





Determination of Eligibility

Department CPR Finding: Student records and interviews indicated that the district is not consistently meeting the 45 day timeline to determine whether the student is eligible for special education and providing the parent with either a proposed IEP or a written explanation of the finding of no eligibility.


1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing the mandated IEP process, procedure and timelines.

2.

Specific attention will be given to the mandated timelines for determination of eligibility and written notification to parents






Review of timelines

3.


4.

Oversight by team chair, assistant principals and clerical staff prior to the expiration of the 45 th day.

5.



Implementation:



Education



1,2 - April, 2011


November 2011











Student Records




Special Education administrators will meet monthly with all Team Chairpersons. The agenda will include review of the 45 day timeline and written notice to parent for a finding of no eligibility.




Determination of Eligibility



Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: The internal monitoring procedures must include a review of student records to ensure ongoing compliance with

45-day timeline for eligibility determination

.

Department Order of Corrective Action: District administrator(s) will conduct an administrative review of student records to ensure ongoing compliance with

45-day timeline for eligibility determination

.


By June 30, 2011 , inform all appropriate staff regarding the regulatory requirements related to the 45-

11

day timeline for eligibility determination. Evidence may include but not be limited to a copy of email or written notification, the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials, and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By June 30, 2011 , submit a description of the tracking system, including names/roles of person(s) responsible for the oversight, for ensuring that eligibility determination notices to parents are provided within the required timelines.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review for compliance with the 45-day timeline for eligibility determination from records of students from all building levels (E, MS, HS) who had an initial evaluation or re-evaluation conducted subsequent to staff notice. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of student records reviewed from each level, the number of records found in compliance with requirements and the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.






Criterion & Topic : SE 12 Rating: Partially Implemented

Frequency of re-evaluation

Department CPR Finding: Review of student records and interviews indicated that the district inconsistently conducts a full re-evaluation consistent with the requirements of federal law.


1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing the re-evaluation assessment components:

2.

Specific attention will be given to required assessments and timelines:






Review of exemplars of correctly completed re-evaluation consent forms

3.


4.

Oversight by team chair, assistant principals, psychologists and clerical staff prior to processing of the consent for testing forms at the special education office

5.



Implementation:



Education



1,2 - April, 2011


November 2011


12










Student Records




Special Education administrators will meet monthly with all school psychologists and Team



Chairpersons. The agenda will include review of full re-evaluation requirements and properly completed consent forms with specific review of timelines and discussion of best practice with regard to process and procedure.

Team Chairperson will continue to monitor consent forms and re-evaluation timelines.




Frequency of re-evaluation






By June 30, 2011 , submit evidence that appropriate staff have been informed of the regulatory requirement regarding frequency of re-evaluation timelines. Evidence may include but not be limited to a copy of email or written notification, the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials, and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By June 30, 2011 , submit a description of the tracking system, including names/roles of person(s) responsible for the oversight, for ensuring that full re-evaluations are conducted.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted subsequent to staff notice, regarding the appropriateness and frequency of student records with three-year re-evaluations from all building levels (E, MS, HS). Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of student records reviewed from each level, the number of records found in compliance with requirements

and

the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.



13





Progress Reports

Department CPR Finding: Student record review indicated that progress reports are not consistently present in the student records. Further, progress reports at all school levels do not consistently include written information on the student's progress toward the annual goals in the IEP.


1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing the process and procedure for writing and documenting IEP progress reports.

2.

Specific attention will be given to requirement for progress reports






Review of models of correctly completed progress reports



Practice with providing written information that specifically documents measurable progress toward student goals

3.

Revisit with district special education staff, assistant principals and team chairs at monthly building meetings, providing technical assistance as needed.

4.

Oversight by team chair, assistant principals and clerical staff prior to the progress reports being mailed to parents.

5.


6.

Quarterly checklists will be completed by each liaison with progress reports and will be monitored by both the Team Chairperson and clerical staff.


Implementation:



Education



1,2 - April, 2011


November 2011


6 – October, 2011










Student Records




Special Education administrators will meet monthly with all liaisons and Team Chairpersons.

The agenda will include review of IEP progress report timelines and checklists, and review of timelines and discussion of best practice with regard to process and procedure.



Team Chairpersons and clerical staff will monitor checklists.




Progress Reports





14


By June 30, 2011 , submit evidence that appropriate staff have been informed of the regulatory requirement regarding written information on student progress toward annual goals and the documenting of progress reports in student files. Staff notice should involve only those teachers, team chairs, and other staff responsible for completing progress reports and ensuring that they are placed in student records.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted subsequent to staff notice, for student progress reports from all building levels (E, MS,

HS)s. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of progress reports reviewed from each level, the number of records found in compliance with progress reports requirements

and








Review and revision of IEPs


Department CPR Finding: Review of student records and interviews indicated that the district is not consistently holding a Team meeting annually, on or before the anniversary date of the IEP.

Narrative Description of Corrective Action: Narrative Description of Corrective Action:

1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing the mandated IEP processes, timelines and procedures

2.

Specific attention will be given to review IEP dates and timelines




3.


4.

Oversight by team chair, assistant principals, and clerical staff

5.


Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for Expected Date of Completion for Each

Implementation:



Education


1,2 - April, 2011

3,4 - May, June, September, October,

November 2011

5- June, November 2011










Student Records

15




Print monthly the eSped due date report for annual reviews and provide to the liaisons and team chairpersons.




Review and revision of IEPs






By June 30, 2011 , submit evidence that appropriate staff have been informed of the regulatory requirement regarding the required timeline for conducting

annual IEP meetings. E

vidence may include but not be limited to

a

copy of email or written notification, the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials, and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By

June 30, 2011

, submit a description of the internal tracking system, including person(s) responsible for the oversight, for ensuring that annual IEP meeting timelines are met.

By

October 7, 2011

, submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted

subsequent to staff notice,

of annual IEP meetings from all building levels (E, MS,

HS). Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of records reviewed from each level, the number of records found in compliance with timeline requirements and







Criterion & Topic: SE 18A Rating: Partially Implemented

IEP development and content

Department CPR Finding: Review of student records indicated that the IEP is not completed addressing all elements of the most current IEP format provided by the Department of Elementary and

Secondary Education. Specifically, the Present Level of Educational Performance A and B (PLEP A and PLEP B) forms, which address the student’s current performance related to the general curriculum and other educational needs, were often left blank.

16


1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing the mandated IEP processes and procedures

2.

Specific attention will be given to IEP development and content






Review of models of correctly completed forms (PLEP A & B)

3.


4.

Oversight by team chair, assistant principals and clerical staff prior to the IEP being written, processed and mailed.

5.


6.




Implementation:



Education



1,2 - April, 2011


November 2011


6 – May, 2011










Student Records




Special Education administrators will meet monthly with all Team Chairpersons. The agenda will include review of IEP procedural checklists, review of timelines and discussion of best practice with regard to process and procedure.






Criterion & Topic : SE 18A

IEP development and content






By June 30, 2011 , submit evidence of training for appropriate staff regarding IEP completion, including PLEP pages A and B. Evidence may include but not be limited to the dates of the professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials and a list of those in attendance

(name, role and signatures).

By June 30, 2011 , submit the procedural checklist. Indicate the administrative staff responsible for ensuring that IEPs are completed including PLEP pages A and B.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted subsequent to the training from student records from all building levels (E, MS, HS).

17

Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of IEPs reviewed from each level, the number of records found in compliance with IEP completion requirements and the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.






Criterion & Topic: SE 18B Rating: Partially Implemented

Placement & Provision of IEP

Department CPR Finding: Review of student records and interviews indicated that some placement pages are not consistently signed by parents. Additionally, it was noted that the district in some instances was using amendments to change student placements in lieu of reconvening the Team.


1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing the mandated IEP processes, procedures and appropriate use of amendments.

2.

Specific attention will be given to obtaining parental consent for placement:




3.


4.

Oversight by team chair, assistant principals and clerical staff prior to the IEP being mailed.

5.



Implementation:



Education



1,2 - April, 2011


November 2011











Student Records




Special Education administrators will meet monthly with all Team Chairpersons. The agenda will include review of the use of amendments and obtaining parental consent for student placement.



Criterion & Topic: SE 18B

Placement & Provision of IEP



18

Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: The district did not indicate that a tracking system is in place to ensure that IEP Placement pages are signed by parents.

Department Order of Corrective Action: Develop a tracking system to ensure that IEP Placement pages are signed by parents.


By June 30, 2011 , submit evidence that appropriate staff have been informed of the regulatory requirements regarding parental signature of the IEP Placement page (PL1) and have received IEP amendment training. Evidence may include but not be limited to a copy of email or written notification, and the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials, and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By June 30, 2011 , submit a description of the internal oversight and tracking system, including person(s) responsible for the oversight, for ensuring that placement pages and amendments are appropriate and are tracked. For a newly developed tracking system, include evidence of training on the new system to appropriate staff. Evidence may include but not be limited to the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials, and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review of IEP placement pages and amendments completed, subsequent to the training, from student records at all building levels (E, MS, HS). Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of amendments and IEP student placement pages reviewed from each level, the number of records found in compliance with placement and amendment requirements and the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.







IEP implementation

Department CPR Finding: Review of student records and interviews indicated that the school district does not consistently provide mutually agreed upon services without delay. When a delay does occur the district does not consistently inform the parent in writing as required, or offer alternative methods to meet goals on the accepted IEP. Student records also demonstrated that the district does not consistently have an IEP in effect for each eligible student within its jurisdiction at the beginning of each school year. Further, interviews indicated that teachers and providers described in the IEP are not always informed of their specific responsibilities related to the implementation of the student’s IEP and the specific accommodations, modifications, and supports that must be provided for the student under it.

19


1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing the mandated IEP timelines, processes and procedures.

2.

Specific attention will be given to IEP implementation and processes for alternative methods to meet goals

3.

Team Chairperson will provide oversight for unsigned IEP’s and notifying team members when an IEP has been signed.







4.

Oversight by team chair, assistant principals and clerical staff when the IEP is accepted

5.

Random record review both internally and by consultants to assess accurate completion of criterion

6.

Training for all administrators regarding the role of the principal in ensuring that teachers and providers are informed of specific responsibilities related to student IEPs. Principals will review this responsibility with all staff annually and require documentation that all staff have been informed of responsibilities relative to the IEPs.


Implementation:



Education



1,2 - April, 2011


November 2011


6 – April, 2011








 eSped monthly reporting of unsigned IEPs



Student Records



Agenda from faculty meetings at each building

 Submission of “IEP responsibility sign off” sheets from teachers and providers to student file




Analyze data quarterly to document compliance with IEP implementation monthly.



Clerical staff will provide special education administrative team with log of submitted “IEP responsibility sign off sheets” bi-annually.




IEP implementation



Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: An administrative monitoring process needs to be developed and in place to ensure 1.) that eligible students have an IEP in effect at the beginning of each school year, 2.) that mutually agreed-upon services are provided without delay, and 3.) that teachers and providers are informed of their responsibilities related to the implementation of student

IEPs.

Department Order of Corrective Action: The district must develop and implement an administrative tracking/monitoring process to ensure 1.) that eligible students have an IEP in effect at the beginning of each school year, 2.) that mutually agreed-upon services are provided without delay, and 3.) that teachers and providers are informed of their responsibilities related to the implementation of student

IEPs.

20


By June 30, 2011 , submit evidence that appropriate staff have been informed of the regulatory requirements regarding the district’s responsibility for 1.) eligible students having an IEP in effect at the beginning of each school year, 2.) providing without delay, mutually agreed-upon services , and 3.) informing teachers and providers of their responsibilities related to the implementation of student IEPs.

Evidence may include but not be limited to a copy of email or written notification, the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials, and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By June 30, 2011 , submit a description of the district’s internal oversight and tracking system regarding the regulatory requirements regarding the district’s responsibility for 1.) eligible students having an IEP in effect at the beginning of each school year, 2.) providing without delay, mutually agreed-upon services , and 3.) informing teachers and providers of their responsibilities related to the implementation of student IEPs. Include person(s) responsible for the oversight.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted subsequent to staff notice, of student records regarding 1.) eligible students having an IEP in effect at the beginning of each school year and , 2.) providing without delay, mutually agreed-upon services. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of IEPs reviewed from each level, the number of consented-to records found in compliance with IEP implementation requirements and the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of administrative interviews of a sampling of teachers and providers from all building levels (E, MS, HS) that they are informed of their responsibilities related to the implementation of student IEPs. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the interviews, the number of interviews from each level including name and role, the number of interviews in compliance with requirements and the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.







Notice to Parent


Department CPR Finding: Review of student records and interviews indicated that when a parent requests an evaluation to determine eligibility for special education, for those students who are part of the child study process, the district does not send written notice to the child's parent(s) within 5 school days of receipt of the referral. The district’s practice for those students is to complete the child study process, which leads to delays in providing the written notice to the parents often by several weeks.

21


1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing the mandated student support team and referral processes

2.

Specific attention will be given to timeline for providing proposed assessment notification to parents subsequent to the written parent request for assessment. Additionally the student support team process will be amended by the administrative team to address meeting this requirement for students in the student support team process




3.


4.

Oversight by team chair, assistant principals and clerical staff prior to the consent form being mailed

5.



Implementation:



Education



1,2 - April, 2011


November 2011









 eSped timeline reporting data



Student Records




Special Education administrators will meet monthly with all principals, assistant principals, and team chairs. The agenda will include review of student support team process for both parent referrals and team referrals to special education.



Use eSped data to insure that consents are being provided to parents no later than five days after receipt of a parent request for testing.




Notice to Parent






By June 30, 2011 , submit evidence that appropriate staff have been informed of the regulatory requirement relating to timeline requirement for requests to determine eligibility and evidence that appropriate staff have been provided training on the district’s updated mandated student support team and referral process. Evidence may include but not be limited to a copy of email or written notification, the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials, and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted subsequent to the training, of student eligibility timelines from all building levels (E, MS,

HS) for those referrals resulting from the Child Study process. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of student records reviewed from each level, the number

22

of parent notices found in compliance with requirements and the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.







Parental consent

Department CPR Finding: Review of student records and interviews indicated in some instances that the district begins some services prior to receiving written parental consent to the IEP. Additionally, records indicated that when an IEP goes unsigned for an extended period of time, the district does not attempt to secure the consent of the parent through multiple means using a variety of methods which are documented by the district. The lack of follow up resulted in more than forty-six IEPs which were unsigned in excess of two months after the IEP meeting during the 2009-2010 school year.


1.

All staff will participate in professional development reviewing IEP process and procedures.

2.

Specific attention will be given to timeline and procedure for securing parental consent and documentation of repeated attempts to obtain parent consent.




3.

Revisit with liaisons, assistant principals and team chairs at monthly building meetings, providing technical assistance as needed. (Monthly reports from eSped- Unsigned IEP

Register reviewed by special education administrative assistant and provided to applicable liaisons/team chairpersons at monthly building meetings.)

4.

Oversight by team chair, assistant principals and clerical staff (All parent responses will be stamped with date of receipt).

5.


6.

A checklist will be developed and implemented documenting a variety of methods sought for obtaining parental consent for IEPs.


Implementation:

Linda Rakiey, Director of Special Education,


Education



1,2 - April, 2011


November 2011


6 – October, 2011




Student Records



Monthly eSped unsigned IEP Register Data

23




Clerical staff will monitor receipt of IEP signature pages and document a variety of repeated attempts to obtain parental consent. This information will be shared monthly with the Special

Education administrative team.



Criterion& Topic: SE 25

Parental Consent



Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: The district must ensure that IEP services are not provided without the written consent of parents or guardians.

Department Order of Corrective Action: The district must develop and implement an administrative tracking/monitoring process to ensure that IEP services are not provided without the written consent of parents or guardians.


By June 30, 2011 , submit evidence that appropriate staff have been informed of the regulatory requirement regarding parental consent and the provision of services. Evidence may include but not be limited to a copy of email or written notification, the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials, and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By June 30, 2011 , submit a description of the internal oversight and tracking system, including person(s) responsible (name, title) for the oversight, for ensuring that parent consent, including attempts to secure consent, are documented, and that services are not provided until consent is documented in writing.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review of student records from all building levels (E, MS, HS), conducted subsequent to the training, to determine if parental consent is documented in the record. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of IEPs reviewed from each level, the number of parental consents found in compliance, the number of records that documented multiple attempts to secure consent and if consent was provided, and the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.



24




Criterion & Topic: SE 25A Rating: Partially Implemented

Special Education Appeals

Department CPR Finding:

Review of documentation and interviews indicated that within five calendar days of receiving notice that a parent is requesting a hearing or has rejected an IEP, proposed placement, or finding of no eligibility for special education, the district does not always send a copy of the rejected IEP to Special

Education Appeals as required.


1.

All rejected plans including those with rejected portions will be sent to the BSEA within 5 calendar days.

2.

If an IEP remains unsigned over 30 days, and/or the parent has not responded despite repeated attempts, the IEP will be sent to the BSEA

.


Implementation:



Education



1,2 - April, 2011




Monthly reports from eSped- Unsigned IEP Register reviewed by special education administrative assistant and provided to applicable liaisons/team chairpersons at monthly building meetings



All parent responses will be stamped with date of receipt and date mailed to BSEA if appropriate



Student records


Monthly review of outstanding/rejected plans by administration to monitor compliance and compile data.



Criterion & Topic: SE 25A

Special Education Appeals






By June 30, 2011 , submit evidence that appropriate staff have been informed of the regulatory requirement regarding when a parent is requesting a hearing or has rejected an IEP, proposed placement, or finding of no eligibility for special education. Evidence may include but not be limited to a copy of email or written notification, the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials, and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted subsequent to the training, of BSEA notices from each building/level (E, MS, HS). Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of IEPs reviewed from each

25

level, the number of BSEA referrals found in compliance with requirements and the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.







Communications are in English and primary language of home

Department CPR Finding: Review of student records, district documentation and interviews indicated that the district’s written communications are not always in the primary language of the home, if that primary language is other than English. Interviews also indicated that there is no formal system for the use of oral interpreters.


1.

NMRSD has established a contract with Catholic Charities to provide oral and written translations in all languages as needed.

2.

NMRSD will have procedural safeguards, assessment, and IEP documents available to parents/guardians in their native language(s).


Implementation:



Education



1,2 – April, 2011




Copies of contracts for interpreters and/or translation of documents



Documentation in IEPs of the need for translation/interpreter and specific language requirement.



Special Education Guideline Booklet for district employees section on process for obtaining these services



ELE Program Manual



Records review


The process for obtaining these services including updates and additions will be discussed annually at each district school during scheduled special education meetings in May of each year. Random record reviews both internally and by consultants to assess accurate completion of criterion in May and October of 2011.

26




Communications are in English


Approved Partially Approved Disapproved and primary language of home




By June 30, 2011, submit a copy of the updated IEP Checklist, with a check-off that will indicate:

Communication to Parent in Language Other Than English. Submit evidence that appropriate staff have been informed of the regulatory requirement and the district’s updated IEP Checklist and process for obtaining translation services. Evidence may include but not be limited to a copy of email or written notification, the date(s) of professional development activity(ies), the agenda, resource materials, and a list of those in attendance, including name(s), their role(s), and signature(s).

By June 30, 2011 , submit a description of the district’s procedures, including person(s) responsible for the oversight, for ensuring that interpreters are familiar with special education procedures, programs and services.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review, conducted subsequent to the training, of student files whose primary language of the home is other than English, including those requiring interpreters. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of student records where written translation is needed and where interpreters are required , the number found in compliance with interpreter and translation requirements and the root cause(s) for any remaining instances of non-compliance, and further actions taken by the district to remedy identified issues.







Special Education Teacher Licensure


Department CPR Finding: Review of documentation and interviews indicated that the school-to-work instructor who designs and/or provides direct special education services described in IEPs is not appropriately licensed and does not hold a current waiver.


1.

The School to Work Instructor will obtain a waiver or certification. He has completed the licensure application and is scheduled for the MTEL on March 5, 2011.

2.

NMRSD will apply for a waiver of certification.

27


Implementation:


Barbara Conti, Human Resources Director



1,2 - June, 2011




Copy of licensure or current waiver


In July of each school year, Human Resources Director and Special Ed Director will systematically review licensure of all special education staff and related service providers.




Special Education Teacher



Licensure




By June 30, 2011, submit evidence of the ESE waiver for the School to Work Instructor.

By October 7, 2011, submit evidence of certification or current waiver for the School to Work

Instructor.






Special education facilities and classrooms

Department CPR Finding: Observation and interviews demonstrated that the space used for the high school Life Skills program is inadequate for the number of students and adults who use the space. The room is a small room with a crowded environment and its location within the building does not maximize the inclusion of such students into the life of the school. This classroom is not given the same priority as general education programs.


1.

Increase the number of ACHIEVE classrooms from one to two to provide additional space.

2.

The additional classroom will be located in a new location within the life of the school.

3.

A general education classroom will be relocated adjacent to the remaining ACHIEVE/life skills classroom

.


Implementation:



Education



1 – September, 2010

2, 3 - August 30, 2011


All special education facilities and classrooms will comply with all elements of this criterion.

28

Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: Schedule building tour and discussion with each building principal/assistant principal, building/grounds director, director/assistant director of special education annually in July/August to review placement of all special education classrooms and amount of space.




Special education facilities and


Approved Partially Approved Disapproved classrooms




By June 30, 2011,

provide a copy of floor plan(s) indicating the location of the

ACHIEVE/life skills classrooms.

By October 7, 2011 , provide confirmation regarding a scheduled onsite visit by DESE to review the

ACHIEVE/life skills classrooms.

Progress Report Due Date(s): June 30, 2011 and October 7, 2011





Special education programs and services are evaluated

Department CPR Finding: Documentation and interviews indicated that the district has no process in place to regularly evaluate the s pecial education programs and services.


1.

In FY2010 a preschool evaluation was completed.

2.

Develop Four Year Plan:



FY2011 Inclusive Practices in middle school and Related Services (OT, PT, Speech),



FY2012 Inclusive Practices at the high school, IEP Team Process



FY2013 Inclusive Practices at the Elementary level, Programs District-Wide



1, 2 - June 30, 2011


Implementation:



Education




Formal Program Evaluation Schedule



Planning Meeting Agendas



Program Evaluation Reports



SEPAC Agendas

29


Review plan with SEPAC at annual planning meeting in May/June

and provide progress update during school committee meetings.



Criterion: SE 56

Special education programs and


Approved Partially Approved Disapproved services are evaluated




By October 7, 2011, the district will submit a copy of the results of a written special education evaluation based on the information stated above and indicate any changes made as a result.

Progress Report Due Date(s): October 7, 2011

30





Program Area: Civil Rights

Prepared by: Barbara Conti, Director of Human Resources


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.





Criterion & Topic: CR 7 Rating: Partially Implemented

Information to be translated into languages other than English

Department CPR Finding: Interviews and a review of district documentation indicated that handbooks and codes of conduct, as well as other important information and documents being distributed to parents, are not being translated into the major languages spoken by parents or guardians with limited English skills, nor is there a system for oral translation of these documents in place.

31


#1 Translation of academic program, services, activities, curriculum standards reports and documents



NMRSD has established a contract with Catholic Charities to provide annual reports, handbooks and codes of conduct, as well as other important information and documents in a language that parents and students understand.



NMRSD will have the following documents translated and available in the schools and on line in Spanish: o Standards-based report cards and progress reports for preK-4 students o Middle school and high school report cards o handbooks and codes of conduct o other important information and documents o Translations of the elementary, middle school and high school (program of studies) descriptions of the general education curriculum

#2 Guidance in a student’s native language

NMRSD has contracted with Catholic Charities and will provide guidance in a student’s native language when appropriate.




Expected Date of Completion for

Implementation:

Each Corrective Action Activity:

Assistant Superintendent Deborah Brady, 

The Assistant Principal Group,

May 30, 2011: Translations of report

Guidance Department Chair, cards, progress reports, the programs of

ELE Workgroup, studies, handbooks and codes of

Director of Human Resources, Barbara Conti conduct, as well as other important information and documents and extracurricular activities at schools in the most common languages and posted on the district and school web sites.



May 30, 2011: NMRSD will have the academic handbooks and codes of conduct, as well as other important information and documents and extracurricular documents translated and available in the schools and on line in

Spanish and Mandarin Chinese.

Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Translations of report cards, progress reports, program of studies, handbooks and codes of conduct, as well as other important information and documents and extracurricular activities available at each school and on the district and school web sites in the most common languages and posted on line on each school’s web site and under curriculum for the district.






During the May AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup meeting, needed translations, updates, and additions will be an annual agenda item.



Each May the Workgroup will assess translation needs for the district and will have them translated and posted on the district and school web sites.

32



Criterion & Topic: CR 7 Status of Corrective Action:

Information to be translated into Approved Partially Approved Disapproved languages other than English




By June 30, 2011 , please submit a sampling of documents, including handbooks and codes of conduct, that are translated into the major languages spoken by students, parents or guardians with limited

English skills. Additionally please also provide evidence, such as memos, emails or meeting agendas that demonstrate that the building principals have reviewed this requirement to ensure compliance.

Please include a copy of the logs of requests for translated materials and the status of the provision of the translated materials.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review for the logs of requests and the provision of translated materials. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of documents reviewed by building, the number found in compliance with requirements and further actions taken by the district to remedy any issues identified.

The district will maintain the following documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: list of documents reviewed, date of the review, name(s) of person(s) who conducted the review with roles and signatures.





Criterion & Topic: CR 7B

Structured learning time


Department CPR Finding: Interviews and a review of district documentation demonstrated that physical education is not offered for 11 th or 12 th grade students as required by G.L. c. 71, s. 3.

Narrative Description of Corrective Action: The NMRSD high school program of studies will include physical education course as a requirement for students in both grades 11 and 12.

Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for

Implementation:

Christine Battye, Principal NMRHS

Expected Date of Completion for Each

Corrective Action Activity:



January 2011 : 2011- 2012 Programs of Studies development and approval by school committee



September 2011- Student enrollment

(class rosters for PE classes)



Spring 2011 : Guidance department scheduling of junior and seniors ( as permitted by graduation requirements)

33

Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action:



2011- 2012 Programs of Studies contains requirement for PE course at grade 11 and 12



Student enrollment (class rosters)



Guidance department scheduling of junior and seniors ( as permitted by graduation requirements)



Adequate staffing pattern for PE course offerings

Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures:



Yearly review of program of studies by principal to insure inclusion of PE courses and requirements,



Yearly review of scheduling data for all grades 9-12 by principal,



Yearly review of staffing pattern for PE and recruitment and hiring of adequate staff to maintain sufficient PE course offerings for all high school students.



Criterion & Topic: CR 7B

Structured learning time






By June 30, 2011, please submit a copy of the section of the NMRSD 2011-2012 Program of Studies to the Department that reflects the annual requirement for physical education as well as information regarding the requirement provided to students and parents for this current school year. Additionally please also provide evidence, such as memos, emails or meeting agendas that demonstrate that the district’s Guidance Department has been informed of this requirement to ensure that all students meet this requirement during the course selection process.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a signed statement of assurance from the superintendent that all students are offered physical education as required.





Criterion & Topic: CR 10A Rating: Partially Implemented

Student handbooks and codes of conduct

Department CPR Finding: Interviews and a review of district documentation indicated that handbooks and codes of conduct, as well as other important information and documents being distributed to parents, are not being translated into the major languages spoken by parents or guardians with limited English skills, nor is there a system for oral translation of these documents in place. See CR 7 and ELE 11.

34


# 1 Translation of academic program, services, activities, academic standards reports and documents






NMRSD will have the following documents translated and available in the schools and on line in Spanish: o Standards-based report cards and progress reports for preK-4 students o Middle school and high school report cards o handbooks and codes of conduct o academic program, services, activities, academic standards o Translations of the elementary, middle school and high school (program of studies) descriptions of the general education curriculum


NMRSD has contracted with Catholic Charities and will provide guidance in a student’s native language when appropriate.


Implementation:





Assistant Superintendent Deborah Brady,




May 30, 2011: Translations of report cards, progress reports, the programs of

Guidance Department Chair,

ELE Workgroup studies, handbooks and codes of conduct, information regarding academic programs, services, and activities and extracurricular activities at schools in the most common languages and posted on the district and school web sites.



May 30, 2011: NMRSD will have the academic handbooks and codes of conduct, information regarding academic programs, services, and activities and extra-curricular documents translated and available in the schools and on line in Spanish and

Mandarin Chinese.


Translations of report cards, progress reports, program of studies, handbooks and codes of conduct, information regarding academic programs, services and documents and extracurricular activities available at each school and on the district and school web sites in the most common languages and posted on line on each school’s web site and under curriculum for the district.




During the May AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup meeting, needed translations, updates, and

 additions will be an annual agenda item.


35



Criterion & Topic : CR 10A Status of Corrective Action:

Student handbooks and codes of Approved Partially Approved Disapproved conduct




By June 30, 2011 , please submit a sampling of documents, including handbooks and codes of conduct, that are translated into the major languages spoken by students, parents or guardians with limited

English skills. Additionally please also provide evidence, such as memos, emails or meeting agendas that demonstrate that the building principals have reviewed this requirement to ensure compliance.

Please include a copy of the logs of requests for translated materials and the status of the provision of the translated materials.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review for the logs of requests and the provision of translated materials. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of documents reviewed by building, the number found in compliance with requirements and further actions taken by the district to remedy any issues identified.

The district will maintain the following documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: list of documents reviewed, date of the review, name(s) of person(s) who conducted the review with roles and signatures.





Criterion & Topic: CR 13

Information and academic counseling


Department CPR Finding: Interviews and documentation indicated that limited English proficient students do not have the opportunity to receive the same information and academic counseling as other students on the full range of general curricular and any occupational/vocational opportunities available to them in a language they understand. See ELE 11.

36










NMRSD has contracted with Catholic Charities and will provide guidance in a student’s native language when appropriate





Implementation:







Director of Human Resources, Barbara Conti conduct, information regarding academic programs, services, and activities and extracurricular activities at schools in the most common languages and posted on the district and school web sites.



May 30, 2011: NMRSD will have the academic handbooks and codes of conduct

, information

regarding academic programs, services, and activities and extra-curricular documents translated and available in the schools and on line in Spanish and

Mandarin Chinese.


Translations of report cards, progress reports, program of studies, and extracurricular activities available at each school and on the district and school web sites in the most common languages and posted on line on each school’s web site and under curriculum for the district.


During the May AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup meeting, needed translations, updates, and additions will be an annual agenda item.

37




Information and academic counseling






By June 30, 2011 , please submit a list of translated documents regarding academic programs, services, activities or academic standards that have been provided to limited English proficient students during the 2010-2011 school year. Submit a list of native language services provided to LEP students by guidance or counselors and provide evidence that LEP students are provided equal opportunity to access the curriculum.

By October 7, 2011, submit a copy of the May AP/Guidance ELE Workgroup meeting agenda, attendance list and a narrative description of the outcome regarding translations. Submit the results of an internal review of ELE records from each building. Include the number of records of limited English proficient students reviewed, number in compliance with translated notices regarding activities, responsibilities and academic standards, as well as those who receive native language guidance or counseling, the root cause(s) of any noncompliance and specific corrective action taken to remedy any noncompliance.

The district will maintain the following documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: list of student names and grade levels for the records reviewed, date of the review, name(s) of person(s) who conducted the review with roles and signatures.






Counseling and counseling materials


Department CPR Finding: Interviews and documentation show that limited-English-proficient students do not have the opportunity to receive guidance and counseling in a language they understand. See ELE 11.

38










NMRSD has contracted with Catholic Charities and will provide guidance in a student’s native language when appropriate





Implementation:







Director of Human Resources, Barbara Conti conduct, information regarding academic programs, services, and activities and extracurricular activities at schools in the most common languages and posted on the district and school web sites.



May 30, 2011: NMRSD will have the academic handbooks and codes of conduct

, information

regarding academic programs, services, and activities and extra-curricular documents translated and available in the schools and on line in Spanish and

Mandarin Chinese.



Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: During the May AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup meeting, needed translations, updates, and additions will be an annual agenda item.




Counseling and counseling materials



39




By June 30, 2011 , submit a written protocol for the use of an interpreter for the guidance and counseling of LEP students when needed. Provide evidence of translated notices about academic programs, services, activities or academic standards into languages other than English. The district will have the academic handbooks and codes of conduct

, information

regarding academic programs, services, activities and extra-curricular documents translated and available in the schools and on line.

Training for guidance staff in the protocol will be provided, as evidence by the submission of an agenda and attendance sheets. Also,

submit a description of the internal oversight and tracking system, including person(s) responsible for the oversight, for ensuring that

limited-Englishproficient students have the opportunity to receive guidance and counseling in a language they understand and that translated materials are available.

By

October 7, 2011

,

subsequent to the training,

submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review of

limited-English-proficient student

records from each building/level.

Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of records reviewed from each level, the number of records found in compliance with requirements and further actions taken by the district to remedy any issues identified.







Notice to students 16 or over leaving school without

Rating: Partially Implemented a high school diploma

Department CPR Finding: Documentation and staff interviews indicated the district failed to issue the annual written notice to students who attended high school in the district within the past two years who have not yet earned their 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.


1.

The guidance department will create and maintain a data base of all students who withdraw from school.

2.

A written notice will be sent to each student to inform them of the availability of publicly funded post-high school academic support programs and to encourage them to participate in those programs. The letter will also ask the student to contact the school to let the guidance department know of their status relative to competency determination or attendance at another school.

3.

The data base will be updated annually to add or remove students as indicated

40


Implementation:

Christine Battye, Principal and Laurie Smith,

Guidance Department Head





February 2011- data based developed containing students who withdrew over



 past two years

February 2011 - letters sent

June 2011 - data base updated



Updated at the end of every school year by principal and guidance




Data based developed containing students who withdrew over past two years



Copies of letters sent/ master list



Data base updated at the end of the school year



Report of number of students on the list, number of letters sent and the number of responses received, as well as the number of students who report participating in post high school programs and those who achieve a diploma or equivalent




The principal may designate an assistant principal who will review the master list of students at the beginning of each year and approve the letters to be sent.



The principal or designee will follow up with the guidance department head at the end of each school year to ascertain responses and review the updated data base.



The guidance department head will submit an annual report to the superintendent containing the number of students on the list, number of letters sent and the number of responses received, as well as the number of students who report participating in post high school programs and those who achieve a diploma or equivalent.




Notice to students 16 or over leaving school without a high school diploma






By June 30, 2011, please submit a copy of the notification letter sent to all students who left NMRSD

High School within the last 2 school years and had not earned their competency determination or had not transferred to another school district. Provide evidence of guidance staff training, such as memos, emails, meeting agendas, and signed attendance sheets.

By

October 7, 2011

,


submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review of

students

who require annual notification. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of letters reviewed, the number of letters found in compliance with requirements and further actions taken by the district to remedy any issues identified.


41






Responsibilities of the school principal


Department CPR Finding: Interviews and review of documents demonstrated that the instructional support process is inconsistent across the district. Specifically, instructional support services such as remedial instruction, consultative services for teachers and appropriate services for linguistic minorities are not consistently available at each school level. Also, the district does not consistently document their instructional support efforts and results in the student record. Additionally, when an individual student is referred for an evaluation to determine eligibility for special education, there is no system to document the use of instructional support services as part of the evaluation information reviewed by the Team when determining eligibility .


1.

The Assistant Principal Workgroup along with the Assistant Superintendent, Director of

Curriculum, and the SPED Director and Assistant Director DCAP began the revision of the district DCAP and the Student Support Team process and forms in the fall of 2011.

2.

The revised DCAP will be finalized, presented to each school faculty by assistant principals, and to the Superintendent’s Advisory Council (SAC I and II) by May 2011

3.

The new process for this is as follows:



The Student Support Team is convened when a student experiences school difficulties to provide support.



The district will use following process:



Gather available information about the student (observations of student in varied environments, review student’s work habits, educational history, learning profile, portfolio, cultural and linguistic background)



Identify Students Strengths and Needs



Identify and Implement Strategies ( use of instructional support services, building based teams, enrichments programs and academic support programs, make accommodations to the curriculum, teaching strategies, teaching environments or materials)



Evaluate and Document Strategies and Student progress (If Difficulty persists the team considers alternative programs, referrals for services or interventions or for a

SPED Evaluation.)



Use DCAP documentation form as indicated for documentation of steps taken to support student.


Implementation:

Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and

Instruction, Assistant Principals, Director of

Curriculum and Instruction, SPED Director,

Assistant SPED Director





The SY 2011District Curriculum

Accommodation Plan will be finalized in May 2011, presented to the faculty and Student Support Team process will be implemented by September 2011.



The DCAP will be updated annually.

42




Finalized District Curriculum Accommodation Plan May 2011.



Agendas of the Assistant Principal Work Group that includes Assistant Principals,

SPED Directors, and Curriculum Leadership for October, November, December,

January, February.





Agendas of SAC, March 2011 and May 2011

Agendas of faculty meetings May 2011




District Curriculum Accommodation Plan will be updated annually by Assistant Principal

Group.



Each Assistant Principal will present the results of the Student Assistance Support Team interventions to the group annually.




Responsibilities of the school principal






By June 30, 2011, please submit a copy of the revised District Curriculum Accommodation Plan.

Provide a copy of the written Student Support Team process to ensure that when an individual student is referred for an evaluation to determine eligibility for special education, there is a system to document the use of instructional support services. Additionally, provide evidence of staff training on the DCAP and instructional support services as part of the evaluation information reviewed by the Team to determine eligibility. Include an agenda, handouts and signed attendance sheets.

By October 7, 2011 , subsequent to the training, submit a narrative description of the results of an administrative review of students who have been referred for an evaluation to determine eligibility for special education. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of student records reviewed, the number found in compliance with requirements and further actions taken by the district to remedy any issues identified.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a plan for the annual review of the District Curriculum Accommodation

Plan and any changes made as a result.

The district will maintain the following documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: list of student names and notification letters reviewed, date of the review, name(s) of person(s) who conducted the review with roles and signatures.





Criterion & Topic: CR 23 Rating: Partially Implemented

Comparability of facilities

43

Department CPR Finding: Observation and interviews demonstrated that the space used for the high school Life Skills program is inadequate for the number of students and adults who use the space. The room is a small room with a crowded environment and its location within the building does not maximize the inclusion of such students into the life of the school. This classroom is not given the same priority as general education programs.


4.

Increase the number of ACHIEVE classrooms from one to two to provide additional space.

5.

The additional classroom will be located in a new location within the life of the school.

6.

A general education classroom will be relocated adjacent to the remaining ACHIEVE/life skills classroom

.


Implementation:

Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and

Instruction, Assistant Principals, Director of

Curriculum and Instruction, SPED Director,

Assistant SPED Director



1 – September, 2010

2, 3 - August 30, 2011


All special education facilities and classrooms will comply with all elements of this criterion.

Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: Schedule building tour and discussion with each building principal/assistant principal, building/grounds director, director/assistant director of special education annually in July/August to review placement of all special education classrooms and amount of space.




Comparability of facilities



Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: The district must annually review classrooms used for special education services to ensure that they are inadequate for the number of students and adults who use the space, and that they are given the same priority as general education programs.



By

June 30, 2011

, submit evidence of training for all appropriate staff regarding the

placement of all special education classrooms.

Evidence may include but not be limited to the dates of the training, the agenda, resource materials and a list of those in attendance.

By

June 30, 2011

, submit a description of the internal oversight and tracking system, including person(s) responsible for the oversight, for ensuring that

classrooms used for special education services to ensure that they are inadequate for the number of students and adults who use the space, and that they are given the same priority as general education programs.

By

October 7, 2011

,


conduct an administrative review of classroom placement from the elementary, middle and high school levels and submit a narrative description of the results. Include the name and role of staff person(s) conducting the review, the number of classrooms reviewed from each level, the number of rooms found in compliance with requirements and further actions taken by the district to remedy any issues identified.

The district will maintain the following documentation and make it available to the Department

44

upon request: list of buildings and classrooms reviewed, date of the review, name(s) of person(s) who conducted the review with roles and signatures.






Curriculum review


Department CPR Finding: Interviews and review of documentation demonstrated that the district has no system in place to ensure that individual teachers review all educational materials for simplistic and demeaning generalizations, lacking intellectual merit, on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin and sexual orientation.


1.

A policy will be created to assure that individual teachers review all educational materials for simplistic and demeaning generalizations, lacking intellectual merit, on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin and sexual orientation. The following procedure will be put into place:



The following statement will be attached to every purchase order “ I hereby attest that I have reviewed the educational materials on order here for simplistic and demeaning generalizations, lacking intellectual merit, on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin and sexual orientation.” A signature will be required for this PO to be processed.



Textbook committees will be required to attest to the same comment before recommending a new text book for pilot programs or purchase.



A rubric will be created that identifies the areas to be evaluated for nondiscrimination based on federal, state and local laws and regulations


Implementation:

Barbara Conti, Director of Human Resources

Julie Surprenant, Business Director

Deborah Brady, Assistant Superintendent for

Curriculum





May 2011 new PO for ordering of materials for FY 12 budget



May 2011 development of rubric



May 2011 Draft policy to school committee for approval




Policy: Review of Curriculum Materials To Assure Nondiscrimination



Copies of PO for curriculum materials



Copies of document signed by textbook committees regarding adoption of textbooks



Rubric used by committees



Agenda of PD for teachers and administrators in requirements of policy

45




The Business Director will check each PO for curriculum materials or textbooks for signature.

No PO will be processed for curriculum materials or textbooks without the corresponding signature attesting to the nondiscrimination review.



The Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum will initial all requests for textbooks. Textbooks



 will not be approved for purchase or implementation unless the textbook committee can show evidence of review for nondiscrimination (rubric and signature).

Procedure and rubric for material and textbook review will be reviewed annually.

PD for teachers and administrators in requirements of policy becomes part of yearly civil rights training.




Curriculum review






By June 30, 2011, please submit a copy of the procedure and rubric for material and textbook review.

Provide evidence of training including agenda, handouts and signed attendance sheet that demonstrate that teachers and administrators have been trained in the review of curricular materials.

By October 7, 2011 , submit a plan for the annual professional development training and the district’s annual review of curriculum materials or textbooks and any changes made as a result.

Progress Report Due Date: June 30, 2011 & October 7, 2011





Institutional self-evaluation


Department CPR Finding: The district did not submit documentation related to this criterion and interviews indicated that the district does not evaluate all aspects of its K-12 program annually to ensure that all students, regardless of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, limited English proficiency, sexual orientation, disability, or housing status, have equal access to all programs, including athletics and other extracurricular activities

46


Internal Evaluation of district programs for nondiscrimination: The district will:



Develop clear standards for non discrimination in district programs based on federal, state and local laws and regulations.



Create a rubric for assessing programs based on these standards.





Assess the quality of PD program for administrators and teachers based these standards.

Conduct periodic walkthroughs of classrooms using programmatic standards in rubric.



Conduct school-by-school and district review based upon standards.



Conduct a literature review of all district generated written materials based on the standards



Document findings of walkthroughs and literature reviews.


Implementation:

Barbara Conti, Director of Human Resources



May 2011




Agendas for May 2011 administrative meetings for principals, central office, assistant principals, meetings



Rubric



Walkthrough documentation sheet with description of targeted standards and findings



Course outline for PD



Documentation sheet with description of targeted standard and findings of literature review of all district generated written materials




Conduct periodic walkthroughs of classrooms using programmatic standards in rubric.





Conduct school-by-school and district review based upon standards yearly.

Conduct a yearly literature review of all district generated written materials based on the standards



All new programs will be reviewed using the rubric before implementation.




Institutional self-evaluation






By October 7, 2011, the district will submit a copy of the written civil rights program evaluation based on the protocol provided by the district and include any changes made as the result of the review.

Progress Report Due Date: October 7, 2011

47





Program Area: English Learner Education

Prepared by: North Middlesex Regional School District; Deborah A. Brady


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.





Criterion & Topic: ELE 1

Annual Assessment


Department CPR Finding: Review of student records, documentation and interviews indicated that the district does not always annually assess the English proficiency of all limited English proficient (LEP) students. Additionally, the district is not consistently administering the MEPA and MELA-O annually by qualified staff.


1) Annual Assessment of LEP Students



Develop District Data Base of LEP, waivered, and FLEP students ( ELE Student Programming Data

BaseB ) that includes: 1) specific ELE programming, 2) years in Massachusetts, 3) LEP/FLEP status, 4) recent MEPA and MCAS scores,5) and appropriate local assessments. This ELE Student/DB will be updated and stored on the shared drive so that each school has access to the information and the changes.



Using the ELE Student/DB and the DESE’s guidance document, the AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup will develop the District Plan for ELE and FLEP student Programming for SY2011. Guidance on Using MEPA

Results to Plan Sheltered English Immersion (SEI) Instruction and Make Reclassification Decisions for

Limited English Proficient (LEP) Students provides specific suggestions for ELE programming based upon

English proficiency. Each student’s programmatic needs will be determined using the process recommended by the DESE and recorded in the ELE Student/DB.



The AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup will assess the staffing requirements based on student needs and will develop a plan for hiring and for PD and develop the District ELE PD Plan for Administrators and

Teachers SY 2012 ( ELE PD Plan ).



Include MEPA, and MELA-O on K-12 District Testing Schedule for SY2012.



The ELE Student Programming Data Base and ELE PD Plan will be used by administrators annually to assess the programming. They will look at each student’s needs and through hiring or training to assure the staffing matches student needs.

2) MEPA and MELA-O Training



Schedule retraining and training as QMT Qualified MELA-O Trainers for Guidance Counselors and

Assistant Principals for each school.



Train Assistant Principals, Guidance Counselors, and ELE staff in use of MEPA results based on DESE

“Guidance” document which provides clear guidelines for the use of MEPA Results to Plan Sheltered

English Immersion (SEI) Instruction and Make Reclassification Decisions for Limited English Proficient

(LEP) Students.



NOTE: The ELE PD Plan will go beyond MEPA and MELA-O training and will include the four SEI categories and other necessary trainings for ESL licensing of teachers, staff, and administrators. See ELE 15 for a full description.

48


Implementation:



Deborah Brady,



Assistant Principal/Guidance/ELE

Workgroup

 The Superintendent’s Advisory Council II

(SAC II) Note: SAC II is the second monthly meeting of the principals, directors of SPED, central office, and curriculum leaders.





April 13, 2011: Training of APs,

Guidance, and ELL staff in April

AP/G/ELL Workgroup meeting in the use of the DESE “Guidance” for planning instruction for LEP students



April 13, 2011: ELE Student Data Base will be addressed (Draft completed

1/4/11)



May 30, 2011: ELE Student

Programming Data Base will be finalized



Summer 2011: District Testing

Schedule: Summer 2011 at administrative retreat (no date yet).



May 11 and May 14, 2011: Annual

Assessment of ELE Program will take place at the May meetings of

AP/Guidance/ELL Workgroup (May

11) meeting and May 14, 2011, SAC II meeting



May 30, 2011: Final ELE PD Plan, a comprehensive training plan for teachers and administrators with indistrict as well as out-of-district trainings and courses.




Finalized ELE Student Programming Data Base for SY 2012



Finalized ELE Teacher PD Data Base for SY 2012



District Testing Schedule for SY 2012 updated to include MEPA and MELA-O testing



Agendas and handouts of April and May AP/Guidance/ELL Workgroup and SAC II meetings


The AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup will develop ELE Student Programming Data Base, ELE Teacher PD

Data Base during the spring and finalized each May after this. They will use the data to create a program for the next year for each student. From this, the workgroup will match the present staff with the students and will plan to hire or contract appropriate personnel to support each student’s program and they will develop the ELE Teacher PD Data Base for the following year which will provide the training needed by teachers, ELE teachers, and administrators.



Criterion: ELE 1

Annual Assessment



Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: NMRSD will assess all LEP students annually, and the

MEPA and MELA-O will be administered by qualified staff members who are appropriately trained.

Department Order of Corrective Action: Not Applicable


By October 7, 2011, the AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup will develop ELE Student Programming Data

49

Base, ELE Teacher PD Data Base and submit evidence of staff training on the new procedures. Include the dates of the training, the agenda, training materials used, and the signed attendance sheets that include staff role.

By January 27, 2012, the district will submit the results of an internal review of records of ELE students completion of annual assessments by qualified staff. Indicate the number of student records reviewed, the number in compliance, the root cause(s) of any noncompliance and corrective action taken to remedy any noncompliance.

The district will maintain the following documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: list of parent and student names and grade levels for the records reviewed, date of the review, name(s) of person(s) who conducted the review with roles and signatures.

Progress Report Due Date(s): October 7, 2011 & January 27, 2012





Initial Identification


Department CPR Finding: Interviews, documentation and student records indicated that the district does not have qualified staff members and appropriate procedures and assessments to identify students who are limited English proficient and to assess their level of English proficiency in reading, writing, speaking, and listening.

50


1) Provide ELL and SEI PD and training for administrators, staff, and teachers



Update District Plan for Training in MELA-O and MEPA assessments



Schedule trainings through DESE and through providers for in-house training



Develop ELE PD Plan for 2011

2) Identify LEP students and assess level of proficiency in reading, writing, speaking, and listening

At the April and May Workgroup meetings, train Assistant Principals , Guidance

Counselors, and ELE staff in use of MEPA results based on the DESE document:

Guidance on Using MEPA Results to Plan Sheltered English Immersion (SEI)

Instruction and Make Reclassification Decisions for Limited English Proficient

(LEP) Students

 At AP/Guidance/ELL April and May 2011 meetings, apply the DESE “Guidance” standards to develop appropriate programs for all ELL and FLEP Students. From the students’ needs, Develop ELE Student Programming Data Base

3) Develop procedures to identify and assess the level of proficiency of LEP and FLEP students



Revise ELL Program Manual to include entry, as well as annual procedures for student assessment.



Train Assistant Principals, Guidance Counselors, and ELL staff in appropriate assessments for their grade levels and schools so that identification and assessment of student proficiency will be accurate.

NOTE: District ELE PD Plan for SY 2012 will include MEPA and MELA-O training, but also will include the 4 SEI categories.

The data management system, Protraxx will track teacher attendance and completion of courses and workshops both out-ofdistrict and in-house.

Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for Expected Date of Completion for Each

Implementation:

Dr. Brady, Roxanne Stahl (Administrative Assistant),

Assistant Principals and Guidance Counselors ELL

Staff, ELL Workgroup




April 13, 2011: Training of APs,

Guidance, and ELL staff in AP/G/ELL

Workgroup meeting in the use of the

DESE “Guidance” for planning instruction for LEP students



April 13, 2011: ELE Student

Programming Data Base



May 30, 2011: Finalized ELE Student

Programming Data Base



May 11 and May 14: Annual

Assessment of ELL Program will take place at the May meetings of

AP/Guidance/ELL Workgroup (May

11) meeting and May 14, 2011, SAC II meeting



Finalized ELE Student Programming and ELE PD Plan by May 30: Schedule trainings for PD in ELL and SEI



May 30: Protraxx Data Base of ESL and ELL trainings

51






ELE Student Programming Data Base for SY 2012

ELE PD Data Base



Tracking Teacher and Administrator PD: Protraxx Data Base of scheduled trainings and attendance

Agenda and handouts of April and May AP/G/ELL Workgroup and SAC II meetings





Initial Identification



Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: The district will identify LEP students and assess level of proficiency in reading, writing, speaking, and listening by qualified staff.



By October 7, 2011, the AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup will develop ELE Student Programming Data

Base, ELE Teacher PD Data Base to ensure that ELE students are identified and assessed for their level of English proficiency in reading, writing, speaking, and listening. Submit evidence of staff training on the new procedures. Include the dates of the training, the agenda, training materials used, and the signed attendance sheets that include staff role.

By January 27, 2012, the district will submit the results of an internal review of records of ELE students completion of annual assessments of English proficiency in reading, writing, speaking, and listening by qualified staff. Indicate the number of student records reviewed, the number in compliance, the root cause(s) of any noncompliance and corrective action taken to remedy any noncompliance.







Waiver Procedures


Department CPR Finding: A review of documentation and student records indicated that parents are not informed of their right to apply for a waiver or provided with program descriptions in a language they can understand.

52


Waiver Information



Include waiver information in the initial interview packet and the ELL Program Manual



Modify the ELL Program Manual to include procedures and forms for waivers



Train those who are in the initial meeting with LEP students (Assistant Principals, Guidance

Counselors, or ELL staff) at April AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup

Program Descriptions in the Parent’s Language



Develop program descriptions for elementary and middle schools and provide translations In the most common languages for the HS Program of studies


Implementation:

Deborah Brady, the AP/Guidance/ELL Workgroup, SAC

II





January 2011: Modification of the ELL

Program Manual



April 13: AP/Guidance/ELE

Workgroup training



May 30, 20111: Program descriptions will be translated by May meetings of

AP Workgroup and SAC II meeting.

May 11 and May 19 th respectively.




ELL Program Manual will have a clarified waiver procedure and additional supporting forms for this process.



Translated program documents for Elementary, Middle, and High Schools will be available at each school and posted on district web site.




Documentation that parents were apprised of their option to waiver out of the program will be in all student files. All LEP and FLEP files will be checked in September 2011.



Translated documents and the need to update or add to the list will be part of the annual ELL program evaluation meeting with the AP/Guidance/ELL Workgroup every May.




Waiver Procedures



Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: Parents will be informed of their rights to apply for a waiver and will be provided with program descriptions in a language that they understand.



By October 7, 2011, the district will develop the ELL Program Manual to include procedures and forms for waivers to ensure that parents are informed of their right to apply for a waiver, in a language they understand.

Submit evidence of staff training on the new procedures. Include the dates of the training, the agenda, training materials used, and the signed attendance sheets that include staff role.

By January 27, 2012, the district will submit the results of an internal review of records of ELE students to ensure that parents are notified of their right to apply for a waiver, in a language they understand. Indicate the number of student records reviewed, the number in compliance, the root cause(s) of any noncompliance and corrective action taken to remedy any noncompliance.

53







Program Placement and Structure


Department CPR Finding: Sheltered English immersion (SEI) is a program model for limited English proficient (LEP) students composed of two parts—English as a second language (ESL) and sheltered content instruction. ESL is explicit, direct instruction about the English language, delivered to LEP students only and designed to promote the English language development of LEP students. Sheltered content instruction is an approach for teaching content to LEP students in strategic ways that make the subject matter concepts comprehensible while promoting the LEP students’ English language development.

A review of district documents shows that the district does not have a completed ESL curriculum based on the Massachusetts English Language Proficiency Benchmarks and Outcomes.

For LEP students in the district, the number of hours of direct ESL instruction meets recommended hours as outlined in the Department’s September 2009 guidance document:

“

Guidance on Using MEPA Results to

Plan Sheltered English Immersion (SEI) Instruction and Make Reclassification Decisions for Limited English

Proficient (LEP) Students."

Content instruction is based on the appropriate Massachusetts Curriculum Framework. No staff members have completed all four Categories of training as described in the Commissioner’s Memorandum of June

2004, but the district does have an SEI PD plan in place and is working towards completing Category training for staff.




Accelerate ELE PD Plan by providing in-house and increasing out-of-district training.



Plan for at least one teacher per grade level per school to take all 4 category classes. Offer courses at

NMRSD to all third year teachers.



Develop the ELE PD Plan for SY 2012 and update this plan annually based upon student needs.

54


Implementation:

Deborah Brady, AP/Guidance/ELL Workgroup





May 30, 2011: finalized ELE PD Plan for Teachers and Administrators for

2012



February 2011: Contract with Teachers

21 for teacher and administrative training in SEI.

Draft Document March 30:

Appropriately licensed teachers support the ELL program documented through the annual ELE PD Data Base for Staff which tracks ESL licensure and teacher and administrator training for the ELL

Program and matches programs to students to teachers/contracted services.

Protraxx Document tracks participation in ELE PD March 30.


• Annual ELE PD Plan for Teachers and Administrators for SY 2012 which will include scheduled courses which will indicate the plan school-by-school and grade-level-by-grade level and each contracted or staff member will be linked to student programs for SY 2012

• Protraxx Data Base of ELE PD participation in and outside of district




Annual updates of ELE PD Plan for Teachers and Administrators for SY 2012 which will include scheduled courses which will indicate the plan school-by-school and grade-level-by-grade level and each contracted or staff member will be linked to student programs for SY 2012



Annual updates of Protraxx Data Base of ELE PD participation in and outside of district



Annual AP/Guidance/ELE and SAC II assessment of ELE programmatic needs for students and for staffing in May meetings of AP Workgroup and SAC II.




Program Placement and Structure



Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: North Middlesex RSD has a very low incidence of English language learners (ELLs). The Department’s SIMS data base shows only a handful of students in primary school (4), middle school (5) and high school (2).

The district is working toward its Corrective Action plan. However, its efforts appear concentrated on professional development, and less on development of an ESL curriculum. In this regard, the district should note that although the Massachusetts English Language Proficiency Benchmarks and Outcomes (ELPBO) will be phased out in the coming months, thus the district is no longer expected to base its ESL curriculum on the ELPBO; nevertheless, the district is expected to develop an ESL curriculum, which should be able to stand alone and withstand changes as needed. See also ELE 9 (Instructional Groupings) for additional comments concerning an ESL curriculum.

Internal monitoring procedures must include progress being made regarding the development of an ESL curriculum as well as evidence that core academic subject teachers who have ELLs in their classrooms have completed the four categories of SEI in all schools (elementary, middle, and high school), and that placement of ELLs is with teachers who are trained in sheltering content.

55


Please provide the following:

1) Final ELE SEI PD plan.

2) Evidence, per school, that teachers have completed SEI category training in all four categories.

3) Evidence that ELLs are placed with teachers who have been SEI trained

4) Results of internal monitoring activity.


Please submit the following by October 7, 2011

1) Final ELE SEI PD plan for teachers and administrators indicating the plan for each school and grade levels.

2) A spreadsheet per school indicating all the categories of SEI training each teacher has completed.

3) Two to three sample schedules per school indicating placement of ELLs with teachers who are SEI trained. Submit an update by January 27, 2012

4) A summary of results of internal monitoring activities. Include any non-compliance findings and action taken to remedy such non-compliance.

5) See also ELE 9 (Instructional Groupings) for Corrective Action requirements concerning completion of an ESL curriculum.







Program Exit and Readiness

Department CPR Finding: Documentation and interviews indicated that the district does not have a process in place to re-designate students as Formerly Limited English Proficient (FLEP) and exit them from the ELE program when appropriate.


See ELE 1, ELE 3



Develop procedures for students to be reclassified to FLEP and to be tracked for two years following this change.



Revise ELL Program Manual to include exit procedures as part of the annual procedures for student assessment



Train APs, Guidance, and ELL staff in use of DESE document on using MEPA and other Results for programming and for exiting program



Develop 2012 District ELE Student Programming Data Base which continues to track progress of reclassified students for two years based on MCAS, MEPA, English Proficiency Level and other local and standardized assessments



Review assessments at the April and May AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup meetings annually and develop District ELE Student Programming Data Base which includes programming for the next year.

56

Title/Role of Person(s)

Responsible for

Implementation:

Deborah Brady and the

AP/Guidance/ELL

Workgroup

Expected Date of Completion for Each Corrective Action Activity:

Documentation and monitoring:



January 2011: Revised ELE Program Manual with new process, procedures and forms for determining FLEP status and for tracking

FLEP student progress



April and May, 2011: AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup meeting will match student needs with staffing needs by school



May 30, 2011: ELE Student Programming Data Base which includes student programming




District ELE Student Programming Data Base



Agendas and handouts of April and May SAC II and AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup


Annual updating of District ELE Student Programming Data Base which includes student programming




Program Exit and Readiness



Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: Not Applicable



Please submit the following by October 7, 2011

1) Reclassification and tracking policies and forms use to determine ELLs exit from an ELE program and forms to be used for tracking and monitoring FLEPs for two years.

2) Evidence of training of staff in using documents that deal with exiting and tracking procedures (i.e. an agenda, hand outs, and a copy of sign in sheet).

By January 27, 2012, the district will submit the results of an internal review of records of ELE students who have exited the ELE program to ensure tracking forms are being utilized. Indicate the number of student records reviewed, the number in compliance, the root cause(s) of any noncompliance and corrective action taken to remedy any noncompliance.





Declining Entry to a Program



Department CPR Finding: Documentation, interviews and parent surveys indicated the district was not aware that they must provide English language support to students whose parents have declined entry into the ELE program

57




Develop procedures to provide English language support to students whose parents have declined entry into the ELE program



Include procedures for waived students in ELE Program Manual



Include waived students on ELE Student Programming Data Base along with their assessments and

ELE programming


Implementation:

Deborah Brady, The AP/Guidance/ELL Workgroup



May 30, 2011: Students whose parents have waived ELE program are included in the ELE

Student Data Base

Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Students whose parents have declined entry into the

ELE program are included in the ELE Data Base and are assigned appropriate ELE programming.

Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: At the annual May meeting of the AP/Guidance/ELL

Workgroup, all students’ programs including students whose parents have declined ELE programming will be determined based on student needs.




Declining Entry to a Program




The district will have a clear policy and procedures to provide English language support to students whose parents have declined entry into the ELE program and that appropriate English Language support is provided to the students.



By October 7, 2011, t he district will develop the ELL Program Manual to include procedures and forms for parents to decline entry into the ELE program, and ensure that the students are included in the ELE Data

Base and are assigned appropriate English Language support, in a language they understand. Submit evidence of staff training on the new procedures. Include the dates of the training, the agenda, training materials used, and the signed attendance sheets that include staff role.

By January 27, 2012, the district will submit the results of an internal review of records of ELE students to ensure that parents are notified of their right to decline entry into the ELE program, in a language they understand. Indicate the number of student records reviewed, the number in compliance, the root cause(s) of any noncompliance and corrective action taken to remedy any noncompliance.



58


Instructional Grouping





Department CPR Finding: Documentation and interviews indicated that appropriate proficiency levels are not assessed, and there is no qualified ESL instructor available in the district. Additionally, the district does not have a completed ESL curriculum based on the Massachusetts English Language Proficiency

Benchmarks and Outcomes

Narrative Description of Corrective Action: See ELE 1, ELE 3, ELE 6

1.

Provide a complete ESL curriculum that meets the needs of each LEP and FLEP student.



Develop ELE Program Plans for ELE Students for SY 2012 with assistant principals, guidance counselors, and ELL staff in May to be fully implemented in September 2012.



Hire, support licensure, or re-deploy appropriate personnel to support all LEP and FLEP students


Implementation: Deborah Brady, The

AP/Guidance/ELL Workgroup, NMRSD Human

Resources





May 30, 2011: Develop ELE Student

Data Base for SY 2012 with assistant principals, guidance counselors, and

ELL staff in May to be fully implemented in September



May 30, 2011: Develop from the

Program Plans the appropriate personnel to support all students and document this in the District ELE

Student Programming Data Base.



Winter, spring, summer 2011: Hire, support licensure, contract, or re-deploy appropriate personnel

Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: There will be appropriately licensed staff to support the needs of each LEP student based on their assessment by the Workgroup in May.


Annual program assessment of the needs of students and the professional staff needed to support these needs each May by the AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup in which the ELE Student Programming Data Base is matched with the staffing, appropriate hiring is planned, and the ELE PD Plan is updated to support this plan.




Instructional Grouping



Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: Although the district states, at the start of the CAP for this criterion, that it will provide an ESL curriculum that meets the needs of ELLs and FLEP students, timelines for expected completion are not specifically noted.


Please provide the following:

1) Development of an ESL Curriculum. See also ELE 5 for additional comments concerning an ESL curriculum.

59

2) If students are grouped for ESL classes, provide samples of groups and students’ level of English proficiency.


Please submit by October 7, 2011

1) An ESL curriculum or any completed portion of the ESL curriculum to date. Submit an update by

January 27, 2012 .

2) Names of staff who will provide support to ELLs (See also ELE 14 concerning submission of one or more ESL teacher certificates depending on staff hired).

3) At least three samples of ELL groups per school along with the students level of English proficiency, if applicable.



Criterion & Topic: ELE 10 Rating: Partially Implemented

Parent Notification



Department CPR Finding: Interviews, documentation and student record review demonstrated that upon identification of a student as LEP, and annually thereafter, the district is not issuing a notice to the parents or guardians written where practicable in the primary/home language as well as in English, as required.

Additionally, report cards and progress reports are not consistently provided to parents/guardians whose primary language is not English in a language they understand.






NMRSD has established a contract with Catholic Charities to provide annual reports and documents in a language that parents and students understand.

NMRSD will have the following documents translated and available in the schools and on line in

Spanish: o Standards-based report cards and progress reports for preK-4 students o Middle school an d high school report cards o Translations of the elementary, middle school and high school (program of studies) descriptions of the general education curriculum.



AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup, Barbara Conti



May 30, 2011: Translations of report cards, progress reports, the HS program of studies, and extracurricular activities at schools in the most common languages and posted on the district and school web sites.



Description of Internal Monitoring Procedures: During the May AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup meeting, needed translations, updates, and additions will be an annual agenda item.

60




Parent Notification




The district will provide copy of the revised Parent Notification Letter that includes all required elements, in a language that parents understand. The district will also ensure that report cards and progress reports are provided in a language that parents understand.



By October 7, 2011 , submit a copy of the revised Parent Notification Letter that includes all required elements.

Submit evidence of staff training on the new procedures. Include the dates of the training, the agenda, training materials used, and the signed attendance sheets that include staff role, by October 7, 2011 .

By January 27, 2012, submit the results of an internal review of records from throughout the district.

Include the number of records of limited English proficient students reviewed, number in compliance with sending the parent notification letter annually and translated report cards and progress reports, the root cause(s) of any noncompliance and specific corrective action taken to remedy any noncompliance.







Equal Access to Academic Programs and Services


Department CPR Finding: Documentation, interviews and record review indicated that the district does not consistently translate notices about academic programs, services, activities or academic standards into languages other than English. There is no native language guidance or counseling available for LEP students. Additionally, students do not have equal opportunity to access the curriculum because of the lack of

English language development instruction and in the general education setting none of the staff members have completed all four categories of training related to Sheltered English immersion (SEI). See ELE 5 and

ELE 15

61

Narrative Description of Corrective Action: See ELL 10

1) Translation of academic program, services, activities, and curriculum standards




Spanish: o Standards-based report cards and progress reports for preK-4 students o Middle school and high school report cards o Translations of the elementary, middle school and high school (program of studies) descriptions of the general education curriculum

2) Guidance in a student’s native language

 NMRSD has contracted with Catholic Charities and will provide guidance in a student’s native language when appropriate

3) Provide to ELE students full access to the curriculum by having teachers complete all four categories of

SEI.

NMRSD has accelerated its ELL and SEI PD Plan for Teachers and Administrators for 2011 to facilitate teachers’ ability to complete all four categories related to SEI



AP/Guidance/ELL Workgroup, Barbara Conti





May 30, 2011: NMRSD will have the academic and extra-curricular documents translated and available in the schools and on line in Spanish and

Mandarin Chinese.

May 30, 2011.The accelerated ELE and PD plan will provide training to NMRSD teachers in the four categories.




Translated documents including report cards, progress reports, programs of study, standards





Accelerated SEI PD Plan that includes in-district and out-of-district courses and workshops

Protraxx tracking of teacher and administrative participation in category courses and workshops in the Protraxx PD Data Base







Each year the SEI PD plan will be evaluated and updated to assure staff continues to have access to trainings in the four categories.


Equal Access to Academic Programs and

Services






The district will translate academic programs, services, activities or academic standards program, service, activities, and standards into languages that parents understand. The district will provide native language guidance or counseling and LEP students will have equal opportunity to access the curriculum. General educators will complete all four categories related to SEI.



62

By October 7, 2011 , submit a list of translated documents regarding academic programs, services, activities or academic standards that have been provided to limited English proficient students during the 2010-2011 school year. The district will provide a list of native language guidance or counseling provided to LEP students and demonstrate equal opportunity to access the curriculum. A list of general educators who will be trained in categories related to SEI will be submitted.

By January 27, 2012, submit the results of an internal review of ELE records from throughout the district.

Include the number of records of limited English proficient students reviewed, number in compliance with translated notices regarding activities, responsibilities and academic standards, as well as those who receive native language guidance or counseling, the root cause(s) of any noncompliance and specific corrective action taken to remedy any noncompliance.







Equal Access to Nonacademic and Extracurricular

Programs

Department CPR Finding: Documentation and interviews indicated that information provided to LEP students about extracurricular activities and school events is not provided in a language they understand, either orally or in written form.

Narrative Description of Corrective Action: See ELL 10 and 11

#1 Translation of academic program, services, activities, and curriculum standards




Spanish: o Extracurricular information o School events



AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup, Barbara Conti



By May 11, 2011 a list of activities for each school will be generated

By May 30, 2011 the district procedure for getting translations for events will be developed and provided to the principals.






Equal Access to Nonacademic and

Extracurricular Programs



63


The district does not provide information about extracurricular activities and school events in a language that they understand either orally or in written form.



By October 7, 2011, t he district will develop a procedure for having written or oral translations of notices for events, which will be included in the ELE Program Manual.

By January 27, 2012 , submit documentation of notifications for extracurricular activities and school events translated in the major languages, other than English, spoken in the district. Submit copies of notices sent from all levels during the 2010-2011 school year.





Follow-up Support



Department CPR Finding: Interviews and student records demonstrated that the district does actively monitor students who have exited the ELE program and interviews also indicated that there is no mechanism for language support services, if needed.

Narrative Description of Corrective Action: See ELL # 1, 2, 5, and 6

See also ELE1 #1) Annual Assessment ELE 3 #2) Identify LEP students and assess their level of proficiency

ELE 5 #1) Accelerate SEI and ELL PD Plan, ELE 6 #1) Develop procedures to identify and assess the level of proficiency of LEP and FLEP students

Annual Assessment of LEP Students



The AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup will review all LEP and FLEP students and determine, based on assessments including MEPA, MELA-O, MCAS and local benchmarks, a recommended program for each student. This group will include FLEP students and students whose parents have elected to opt out of the programs and will document their programs for two years after leaving the program in the

ELE Student Programming Data Base.

Update ELL Program Manual

 Modify ELL Program Manual to clarify the need to assess FLEP students’ possible need for English language support for two years after exiting the program.

64

Title/Role of

Person(s)

Responsible for

Implementation:

Deborah Brady, The

AP/Guidance/ELE

Workgroup

Expected Date of Completion for Each Corrective Action Activity:

See ELL # 1, 2, 5, and 6

See also ELE1 #1) Annual Assessment ELE 3 #2) Identify LEP students and assess their level of proficiency

ELE 5 #1) Accelerate SEI and ELL PD Plan, ELE 6 #1) Develop procedures to identify and assess the level of proficiency of LEP and FLEP students



May 11, 2011: Annual Assessment of LEP Students



January 2011: Revised ELL Program Manual



May 30: SY2012 District Plan for LEP and FLEP Student Programming




ELE Student Programming Data Base for SY 2012



Agendas and handouts of April and May AP/Guidance/ELL Workgroup and SAC II meetings



ELL Program Manual modified to clarify the need for supporting FLEP students for two years after exiting the program




Annual Assessment of LEP and FLEP students by the AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup. They will develop the annual District ELE Student Programming Data Base. Students who have left the program will be included in this list until they graduate. Their needs will be assessed at this meeting along with LEP students for two years after leaving the program.




Follow-up Support




The district will monitor the progress of LEP students who have exited the program, and will develop a mechanism to provide language support services for students who have exited the program.



By October 7, 2011 , the ELE Student Programming Data Base will include programming for LEP, FLEP, and waivered students. The district will submit evidence of training for appropriate staff members on the use of the monitoring form and the requirement to monitor students who have exited the ELE program for two years and to provide language support services to those students, if needed. Include the dates of the training, the agenda, training materials used (including monitoring form), and the signed attendance sheets that include staff role and building.

By January 27, 2012 , submit the results of an internal review of records of FLEP students. Include the number of records reviewed, the number of records that include evidence of monitoring, the root causes(s) of any noncompliance and the corrective action taken to remedy any non-compliance.



65





Licensure Requirements


Department CPR Finding: District documentation and interviews indicated that the district has no licensed

ESL teacher in the district; the two designated ESL instructors are tutors without appropriate licensure.


Use District Plan for LEP and FLEP Student Programming to assess the district’s needs for ESL teachers.

Hire appropriate teachers, redeploy present employees, and contract for services, and provide training and PD for general education and ELE tutors and teachers so that they have appropriate licensure


Implementation: Deborah Brady, AP/G/ELL

Workgroup, Barbara Conti, Superintendent



1) May 30, 2011: Use District Plan for

LEP and FLEP Student Programming to assess the district’s needs for ESL teachers.

Winter, Spring, Summer 2011: Hire appropriate teachers of provide training and PE for ELL teachers so that they have appropriate licensure

Evidence of Completion of the Corrective Action: Teachers hold appropriate licenses for their responsibility.


District ELE Student Programming Data Base is used to assess the district’s needs for ESL teachers annually at the AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup May meetings.




Licensure Requirements




Department Order of Corrective Action: Not Applicable


Please provide the following by October 7, 2011 :

1) Licensure copies of ESL teachers.

2) Roster of ELE students with hours of instruction and names of ESL teacher.

Submit an update by January 27, 2012 .


66


Professional Development





Department CPR Finding: Documentation indicated that content instruction is based on the appropriate

Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks. Documentation also indicated that no staff members have completed all four Categories of training as described in the Commissioner’s Memorandum of June 2004, however the district does have a SEI PD plan in place and is working towards completing Category training for staff.


Provide district-supported PD program for teachers



Assess the quality of the PD program for NMRSD Administrators and teachers that includes: professional development plan that provides teachers and administrators with high quality training, as prescribed by the Department, in

 second language learning and teaching;

 sheltering content instruction;

 assessment of speaking and listening; and

 teaching reading and writing to limited English proficient students.



Contract with Teachers 21 to offer summer and school year courses



Provide administrators and teachers with training schedules for MELA and QMT for summer of

2011 and SY 2012

Develop an accelerated ELL and SEI PD Plan for Teachers and Administrators for 2011 that supports student needs

Title/Role of Person(s) Responsible for Implementation:

Deborah Brady



May 30: ELE PD Plan for Teachers and

Administrators for 2012


The ELE PD Plan for Teachers and Administrators for 2012 provides an accelerated in-house plan to support

SEI in NMRSD.


The annual May AP/Guidance/ELL Workgroup and SACII meetings assess the needs of ELL students based on the ELE Student Programming Data Base. They will match students with staff and develop an ELE Staffing

Plan for 2012.




Professional Development






See ELE 5 - Program Placement and Structure for professional development requirements.


67





Program Evaluation


Department CPR Finding: Interviews and documentation indicated that the district has not conducted periodic evaluations of the effectiveness of its ELE program.

Narrative Description of Corrective Action: See ELE 15 (PD quality)

See ELE 1, 3, 6 and 9

1) Internal Evaluation of ELL programs



The May meeting of the AP/Guidance/ELL Workgroup will assess the needs of the students and produce the document: District Plan for LEP and FLEP Student Programming for SY 2012 and from this determine staffing needs to meet students’ English language needs. They will generate the District ELE

Staffing Plan for 2012.



The May meeting also generates ELE Staffing Plan and matches student needs with teacher availability

Finally, the ELE PD Plan supports staff with appropriate trainings and courses.


Deborah Brady, the AP/Guidance/ELL Workgroup



Annually at each May meeting of the

AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup


The three documents: 1) ELE Student Programming Data Base and 2) the ELE Staffing Plan supported by the 3)

ELE PD Plan will be used by administrators to determine the needs of the students (1) and will match them to the staffing needs (2) whether or not their English language needs are being met based on MEPA, MELA-O, MCAS, and local assessments of progress, and will support the staff with (3) appropriate PD.


Each May the AP/Guidance/ELE Workgroup will assess student needs and generate the ELE Student

Programming Data base

They will use student needs to generate the ELE Staffing Plan for the next year.

New staff will be hired, contracted, retrained, or redeployed to support the ELE Staffing plan.




Program Evaluation



Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: The district will evaluate the effectiveness of the ELE program.



By January 27, 2012, the district will submit a copy of the written ELE program evaluation based on the information stated above, including ELL student progress, proficiency test data, observations, and the ELE

Program Effectiveness document.

Progress Report Due Date(s): January 27, 2012

68




Rating: Partially Implemented Criterion & Topic: ELE 18

Records of LEP Students

Department CPR Finding: A review of student records indicated that the district does not meet all the required elements of this criterion. Specifically, not all student records include copies of the annual notice letter, proficiency test scores, results of annual assessments (MEPA, MELA-O, MCAS), previous schooling information, monitoring forms, opt-out forms, waiver forms and Individual Student Success Plans, as appropriate.


1.

Develop Permanent Records Checklist for ELE students to facilitate record keeping from initial interview through at least two years after exiting the program.

2.

Provide training in the checklist for administrative staff in May.

3.

In September meeting of the AP/Guidance Workgroup, assess the completeness of all LEP and FLEP permanent records using the ELE Student Permanent Record Checklist


Deborah Brady, the AP/Guidance/ELL Workgroup



1.

February 2011: Develop checklist for ELE students to facilitate record keeping from initial interview through at least two years after exiting the program. This checklist will be included in each LEP and FLEP student’s file.

2.

May 11: Provide training in the ELE

Student Permanent File Checklist for administrative staff

3.

In September meeting of the AP/Guidance

Workgroup, assess the completeness of all

LEP and FLEP permanent records using the checklist.


Results of permanent record assessment in September 2012 based on the ELE Student Permanent File Checklist


Every September, the files of the ELE students will be assessed for completeness based upon the ELE Student

Permanent Record Checklist.




Records of LEP Students



Basis for Partial Approval or Disapproval: The LEP and FLEP student records will include all the required elements, including: 1) copies of the annual notice letter, 2) proficiency test scores, 3) results of annual assessments (MEPA, MELA-O, MCAS), 4) previous schooling information, 5) monitoring forms, 6) opt-out forms, 7) waiver forms and 8) Individual Student Success Plans, as appropriate.



By October 7, 2011 , The district will develop and submit a ELE Student Permanent Record Checklist. The district will also submit evidence of training for appropriate staff members on the content requirements of LEP student records. Include the dates of the training, the agenda, and the signed attendance sheets that include staff role and building.

69

By January 27, 2012, submit the results of an internal review of LEP student records. Include the number of records reviewed district-wide after the training, the number that include home language surveys, annual parent notification letters, proficiency test scores, annual assessments, previous schooling information, monitoring forms, opt-out and/or waiver forms, progress reports and/or report cards, Individual Student Success Plans (as appropriate) in the native language, the root causes of any noncompliance found and the corrective action taken to remedy any noncompliance.



70