COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
MID-CYCLE REPORT
Charter School: Boston Renaissance Charter Public School
MCR Onsite Dates: 05/03/2013
Program Area: Special Education
Mitchell D. Chester, Ed.D.
Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
MID-CYCLE REPORT
SE Criterion # 7 - Transfer of parental rights at age of majority and
student participation and consent at the age of majority
Rating:
Not Applicable
Basis for Findings:
Boston Renaissance Charter School is a K-6 school.
SE Criterion # 8 - IEP Team composition and attendance
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Student record review and interviews indicated that the school has a process to ensure that
required IEP Team members attend IEP meetings. When a required IEP Team member can't
attend, the district obtains the parent's written permission before the meeting to excuse the
Team member. Excused required Team members provide written input for IEP development
in advance of the meeting. The school has a policy for excusing Team members who are not
necessary because their area of the curriculum or services is not being modified or discussed.
SE Criterion # 9 - Timeline for determination of eligibility and provision
of documentation to parent
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Staff interviews and student record review indicated that within 45 school working days of
receipt of a parent's written consent to an initial evaluation or a re-evaluation, the school
consistently determines whether the student is eligible for special education and provides
either a proposed IEP and placement or a written explanation of a finding of no eligibility to
the parent.
SE Criterion # 10 - End of school year evaluations
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Interviews and student record review indicated that when a parent’s consent for an initial
evaluation or re-evaluation is received between 30 and 45 school working days before the
end of the school year, the school ensures that a Team meeting is scheduled to develop a
proposed IEP or written notice of no finding of eligibility no later than 14 days after the end of
the school year. According to record review, the school consistently conducts evaluations
prior to the end of the school year when consent is received between 30 to 45 school days.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
Boston Renaissance Charter Public (District) Mid-Cycle Report – September 17, 2013 04:43:07 PM
Page 2 of 6
SE Criterion # 12 - Frequency of re-evaluation
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Interviews and student records indicated that the school conducts a full re-evaluation for
students every three years consistent with federal law, unless the school and parent agree
otherwise. Evaluation consent forms indicated that the school consistently proposes to
evaluate students in all area of the suspected disability and in all areas of the previously
identified disability.
SE Criterion # 13 - Progress Reports and content
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Student records indicated that the school consistently sends parents progress reports with the
same frequency as report cards. Additionally, record review demonstrated that special
education progress reporting is well documented in the student files.
SE Criterion # 14 - Review and revision of IEPs
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Student records and interviews indicated that the district consistently convenes the annual
IEP review meeting on or before the anniversary date of the IEP to review, revise, or develop
a new IEP or refer the student for a re-evaluation, as appropriate.
SE Criterion # 18A - IEP development and content
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
A review of documents, interviews, and student records verified that when a student’s
evaluation data indicates that his/her disability affects social skills development or makes
them susceptible to bullying, harassment, or teasing, the IEP addresses the skill and
proficiencies needed to avoid and respond to those affronts. The school’s IEP Teams
specifically address the skills needed to respond to bullying, harassment, or teasing for
students on the autism spectrum.
Student record review indicated that service delivery grids in IEPs consistently reflect the
nature and needs of students as described on the Present Levels of Performance for
academic and non-academic needs (PLEP A and B).
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
Boston Renaissance Charter Public (District) Mid-Cycle Report – September 17, 2013 04:43:07 PM
Page 3 of 6
SE Criterion # 18B - Determination of placement; provision of IEP to
parent
Rating:
Partially Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Student records and staff interviews demonstrated that the school does not provide two (2)
copies of the proposed IEP to parents following the IEP development meeting. According to
staff interviews, the school provides one copy of the IEP and two copies of the signature
page.
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Please create a procedure for providing two (2) copies of the proposed IEP to parents
following the IEP development meeting that includes a means of documenting this provision
in the student record.
Please develop an internal system of periodic review to ensure the provision of two (2) copies
of the proposed IEP to parents and identify the person(s) responsible by name and title for
this internal monitoring.
Please conduct a student record review of 10 records for evidence that parents are given two
(2) copies of the proposed IEP following the IEP development meeting. This sample must be
drawn from records of students whose IEP Team meetings were convened subsequent to the
completion of the school’s corrective actions.
Required Elements of Progress Reports:
Submit a copy of the district’s procedure for providing two (2) copies of the proposed IEP to
parents.
Submit a description of the oversight system and identify the person(s) responsible for
monitoring the completeness of assessment summaries, including the date of the system's
implementation and the staff responsible for the review.
This progress report is due October 28, 2013.
Submit a report of the results of the internal review of records. Include the number of records
reviewed and number of records in compliance. For all records not in compliance with this
criterion, provide corrective actions taken by the district to remedy any non-compliance. This
progress report is due February 24, 2014.
Progress Report Due Date(s):
10/28/13
02/24/2014
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
Boston Renaissance Charter Public (District) Mid-Cycle Report – September 17, 2013 04:43:07 PM
Page 4 of 6
SE Criterion # 24 - Notice to parent regarding proposal or refusal to
initiate or change the identification, evaluation, or educational placement
of the child or the provision of FAPE
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
According to student record review, the district consistently provides notice to the parent
regarding its proposal or refusal to initiate or change the identification, evaluation, or
educational placement of the child or the provision of FAPE.
SE Criterion # 25 - Parental consent
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Document review, interviews and student record review indicated that the school consistently
documents multiple attempts to secure consent of the parent using a variety of methods when
the participation of the parent is required and the parent fails or refuse to participate.
SE Criterion # 26 - Parent participation in meetings
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Student record review indicated that the school consistently documents its attempts to
facilitate the parent's participation in Team meetings when the parent either fails or refuses to
participate. Record review demonstrated that Team meetings are consistently re-scheduled to
accommodate parent schedules.
SE Criterion # 29 - Communications are in English and primary language
of home
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Document review, staff interviews and student records showed that the district consistently
provides oral interpretation and translated written communication with parents in both English
and the primary language of the home.
SE Criterion # 51 - Appropriate special education teacher licensure
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Document review and interviews indicated that the school’s licensed Special Education
teachers are qualified teachers who provide consultation and direct supervision to instructors
who are not licensed but are delivering specialized instruction.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
Boston Renaissance Charter Public (District) Mid-Cycle Report – September 17, 2013 04:43:07 PM
Page 5 of 6
SE Criterion # 55 - Special education facilities and classrooms
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Facility observations demonstrated that related service spaces at the school are no longer
designated as such. Additionally, observations demonstrated that all special education
instructional spaces are identified only by room number and teacher name.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
Boston Renaissance Charter Public (District) Mid-Cycle Report – September 17, 2013 04:43:07 PM
Page 6 of 6