Massachusetts Department of
Elementary and Secondary Education
350 Main Street, Malden, Massachusetts 02148-5023
Telephone: (781) 338-3700
TTY: N.E.T. Relay 1-800-439-2370
June 6, 2008
George Guasconi
Superintendent of Schools
Bridgewater-Raynham Public Schools
415 Central Street
Bridgewater, MA 02324
Re: Mid-cycle Report
Dear Superintendent Guasconi:
Enclosed is the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education's Mid-cycle Report. This
report contains findings based on onsite monitoring the Department conducted to determine the
effectiveness of corrective action it approved or ordered to address noncompliance identified in
your district’s last Coordinated Program Review Report, dated March 24, 2005. The Mid-cycle
Report also contains findings based on onsite monitoring of special education compliance criteria
that have been created or substantially changed in response to IDEA 2004.
The onsite team would like to commend the following programs and practices that were brought
to its attention and that the team believes have a significant positive impact on the education of
students enrolled in the Bridgewater-Raynham Public Schools. These programs and practices are
as follows:
The district carefully monitors their preschool classes so that the number of students in
each class is now well within the requirements for class size.
The Department will notify you of your district's next regularly scheduled CPR several months
before it is to occur. At this time we anticipate that this CPR will occur sometime during the
2011 school year unless the Department determines that there is some reason to schedule this visit
earlier.
While the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education found your district to have
resolved most noncompliance issues, some were partially corrected, or the Department’s onsite
team identified new issues of noncompliance, including but not limited to noncompliance with
special education criteria added or substantially changed in response to IDEA 2004. Where the
district has failed to implement its Coordinated Program Review Corrective Action Plan, the
Department views these findings to be serious. The Office of Special Education Programs of the
U.S. Department of Elementary and Secondary Education requires that all special education
noncompliance be corrected as soon as possible, but in no case later than one year from the time
of identification; where the district has failed to implement its CPR Corrective Action Plan, this
one-year period has long since passed.
1
In all instances where noncompliance has been found, the Department has prescribed corrective
action for the district that must be implemented without delay. (In the case of new findings of
noncompliance, this corrective action must be corrected as soon as possible, but in no case later
than a year from the date of this report.) You will find these requirements for corrective action
included in the enclosed report, along with requirements for progress reporting. Please provide
the Department with your written assurance that all of the Department's requirements for
corrective action will be implemented by your district within the timelines specified in the report.
You must submit your statement of assurance to me by June 20, 2008.
Your staff's cooperation throughout this Mid-cycle Review is appreciated. Should you like
clarification of any part of our report, please do not hesitate to contact me at 781-338-3714.
Sincerely,
Nancy Hicks, Mid-cycle Review Chairperson
Program Quality Assurance Services
Darlene A. Lynch, Director
Program Quality Assurance Services
c:
Mitchell D. Chester, Ed.D., Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education
Gordon Luciano, School Committee Chairperson
Joyce Onischewski and Gay Yelle, District Program Review Follow-up Coordinators
Encl.: Mid-cycle Report
2
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY
EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE REPORT
Bridgewater-Raynham Public Schools
Date of Coordinated Program Review (CPR) Final Report: March 24, 2005
Date Coordinated Program Review Corrective Action Approved or Ordered: August 16 2008
Dates of Corrective Action Plan Progress Reports: January 22, 2007 (Special education criteria approved), March 28, 2007, May 30, 2007, June 17, 2007,
January 29, 2008
Dates of this Mid-cycle Review Onsite Visit: May 6 and 7, 2008
Date of this Report: June 6, 2008
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS REPORT IS IN SEVERAL SECTIONS.
Special Education Criteria Cited in CPR Report and Monitored in Mid-cycle
Current CPR criteria available by scrolling down to the monitoring instruments at http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/default.html
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implement
-ed and
Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

SE 18 A
IEP
Development
and content
Partial
Record review
See SE 8 regarding Team
member attendance.
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

Partial
Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
The student record review
indicates that some IEPs
have missing elements.
Boxes indicating that the
Team considered
transportation and
schedule changes were
sometimes left blank. The
By August 1, 2008, the district
must submit a plan for an
internal monitoring system to
ensure compliance with this
criterion.
By December 15, 2008 the
district must submit the
following:
Bridgewater-Raynham Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 5, 2008
Page 1 of 11
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implement
-ed and
Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
IEP goals do not always
contain information
indicating how the parent
would know if the student
had reached the goal. The
non participation
justification statement
was sometimes not
consistent with the
services on the service
delivery page and the
statement was sometimes
generic and did not
indicate that the
individual student’s needs
were considered.
SE 22
Implementation and
availability
SE 35
Assistive
Technology

Record review
and interview

Documentation
and interviews
The record review indicates that
there was not a gap in the time
when an IEP expired and a new
IEP began. The district is aware
that they can not extend the
period of an IEP beyond one
year.
Documentation and interviews
indicate that assistive
technology is considered at the
Team meeting.
Bridgewater-Raynham Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 5, 2008
Page 2 of 11
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting




The name of the
individual
responsible for
monitoring at each
school.
The number of
records examined
The rate of
compliance
A description of
steps taken when
non compliance
was identified.
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implement
-ed and
Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

SE 36
IEP
Implementation
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
See SE 22.

SE 40
Instructional
grouping

Documentation
and interviews
SE 41
Age Span

Documentation
and interviews
SE 42
Programs for
young children

Documentation
and interviews
SE 49
Related
services

Documentation,
record review
and interviews
SE 51
Appropriate
special

Documentation
Documentation and interviews
indicate that the size of
instructional groups at the high
school meet requirements.
Documentation and interviews
indicate that the age span of
students in instructional
groupings at the high school do
not exceed 48 months.
Documentation and interviews
indicate that the number of
students in all preschool classes
meet the requirements of this
criterion.
Interviews and documentation
indicate that adapted physical
education is provided if
recommended by the Team.
Counseling services are defined
on IEPs with specific frequency
as required.
Documentation indicates that
special education teachers at the
high school have the required
Bridgewater-Raynham Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 5, 2008
Page 3 of 11
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implement
-ed and
Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
certification.
education
licensure
Special Education Criteria Created or Revised in Response to IDEA-2004
Current CPR criteria available by scrolling down to the monitoring instruments at http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/default.html
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
SE 3
Special
requirements
for
determination
of specific
learning
disability
Criterion
Implemented


Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Interviews and
documentation
Documentation and records
indicate that the district is in
the process of training staff
members in the requirements
for the determination of
specific learning disabilities.
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Bridgewater-Raynham Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 5, 2008
Page 4 of 11
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
SE 6 ##1 - 3
Determination
of Transition
Services
SE 8
IEP Team
composition
and attendance
Criterion
Implemented

Partial

Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Interviews,
documentation
and record
review
Documentation and interviews
indicate that transitioning
needs are discussed annually at
the Team meeting and the
Transitional Planning Form is
used as required.
Interviews,
documentation
and record
review
The record review indicated
that IEP teams had the required
members in attendance. Teams
had an individual in attendance
with the authority to commit
district resources. Interviews
indicated that staff members
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Partial
Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
The record review
indicates that not all age
appropriate student
records reviewed had a
Transitional Planning
Form in their record that
was reviewed annually
and updated if needed.
By August 1, 2008, the district
must submit a plan for an
internal monitoring system to
ensure compliance with this
criterion.
By December 15, 2008 the
district must submit the
following:
 The name of the
individual
responsible for
monitoring at the
high school.
 The number of
records examined
 The rate of
compliance
 A description of
steps taken when
non compliance
was identified.
Bridgewater-Raynham Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 5, 2008
Page 5 of 11
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
SE 12
Frequency of
re-evaluation
SE 13
Progress
Reports and
content
SE 14
Review and
revision of
IEPs
SE 25B
Resolution of
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
Record review

Partial

Record review
and interviews
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

were aware of procedures for
Team member excusal.
The record review indicated
that the district meets the
requirements concerning the
frequency of re-evaluation.
Interviews indicated that
progress reports contain the
required information and are
issued with the required
frequency.
Partial
Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Not all student records
reviewed contained
progress reports for each
IEP goal for each period.
By August 1, 2008, the district
must submit a plan for an
internal monitoring system to
ensure compliance with this
criterion.
By December 15, 2008 the
district must submit the
following:
 The name of the
individual
responsible for
monitoring at each
school.
 The number of
records examined.
 The rate of
compliance.
A description of steps taken
when non compliance was
identified.
Interviews indicate that
the district would depend
By December 15, 2008 the
district must submit a
Interviews and student records
indicate that the district meets
at least annually to review,
revise or develop a new IEP.
Record review
and interviews

Bridgewater-Raynham Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 5, 2008
Page 6 of 11
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

disputes
SE 33
Involvement in
the General
Curriculum
SE 39A
Procedures for
services to
eligible private
school students
whose parents
reside in the
district

Record review
and interviews

Interviews and
documentation
Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
on the advice of counsel
whenever a BSEA hearing
was requested. It does not
have procedures in place
to meet this criterion.
description of the steps taken
in response to a request for a
hearing with the Bureau of the
Special Education Appeals, a
copy of any agreements to
waive a resolution session, or a
copy of any legally binding
agreement reached.
Student records indicate that
IEP Teams have at least one
member familiar with the
general curriculum. Student
schedules and IEPs indicate
that students with disabilities
participate in the general
curriculum.
Documentation and interviews
indicate that the district
provides special education
services to eligible students
enrolled in private schools at
private expense and they
complete the required
documentation to document the
proportionate share of federal
funds expended.
Bridgewater-Raynham Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 5, 2008
Page 7 of 11
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
SE 39B
Procedures for
services to
eligible
students in
private schools
in the district
whose parents
reside out of
state
SE 46
Procedures for
suspension of
students with
disabilities
more than 10
days
SE 52
Appropriate
certifications/
licenses or
other
credentials –
related service
providers
(to be reviewed
only with
respect to
providers of
interpreting
services)
Criterion
Implemented




Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Interviews and
documentation
The district had no eligible
students in private schools
whose parents reside out of
state.
Student
records,
documentation
and interviews
Documentation, interviews and
student records indicate that
the district follows required
procedures when suspending
students with disabilities.
Interviews and
documentation
Documentation indicates the
district would require those
who provide interpreting
services to be registered with
the MA Commission for the
Deaf and Hard of Hearing.
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Bridgewater-Raynham Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 5, 2008
Page 8 of 11
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Special Education Criteria Monitored because of Issues Identified since the CPR
Current CPR criteria available by scrolling down to the monitoring instruments at http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/default.html
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
SE 22
Implementation and
availability
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Partial
Interviews and
documentation
Interviews and
documentation indicate that
speech services were not
provided to students this
school year at Williams
Middle School as indicated
on the students’ IEPs due to
lack of personnel. The
district did inform the
parents in writing and did
advertise to fill the position.
In February, arrangements
were made to offer
compensatory services for
eligible students during
vacations or weekends. On
May 9, 2008, the Department
was informed that the district
had hired a speech therapist
and the position at the
Williams School was now
filled.
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Partial
Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Interviews and
documentation indicate
that the district did not
immediately implement in
September 2007
alternative methods of
providing direct speech
services or consistent
consultant services that
were specified on
student’s IEPs at the
Williams Middle School.
In February 2008, when
offers were made in a
letter to parents to provide
compensatory services,
the district did not make it
clear if transportation
would be arranged or
parents would be
compensated so that all
eligible students would
have access to these
services.
By August 1, 2008, the district
must submit a description of
district’s procedures that will
ensure that alternative methods
of providing IEP services are
put in place immediately when
students’ IEPs can not be
implemented because of a lack
of personnel.
Bridgewater-Raynham Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 5, 2008
Page 9 of 11
Criteria from Other Regulated Programs Monitored During this Mid-cycle Review
Current CPR criteria available by scrolling down to the monitoring instruments at http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/default.html
Criterion
Number/Topic
ELE 11
Equal Access
to Academic
Programs and
Services
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective
Or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Based on documentation and an
interview, LEP students are not
segregated from their non
English-speaking peers and that
they are taught to the same
academic standards.
Documentation and interviews
indicate that the district has a
number of teachers trained in
SEI and they have plans to
expand the number of trained
teachers and the areas of their
competency. Procedures are in
place to access interpreters and
translated documents so that
students could have the
Bridgewater-Raynham Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 5, 2008
Page 10 of 11
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective
Or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
opportunity to receive
counseling in their primary
language.
Bridgewater-Raynham Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 5, 2008
Page 11 of 11
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements