The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Department of Education
350 Main Street, Malden, Massachusetts 02148-5023
Telephone: (781) 338-3700
TTY: N.E.T. Relay 1-800-439-2370
April 17, 2007
Dr. Thomas Kingston, Superintendent
Chelsea Public Schools
City Hall Room 216
500 Broadway
Chelsea, MA 02150
Re: Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report
Dear Superintendent Kingston:
Enclosed is the Department of Education's Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report (MidCycle Report). This report contains findings based on onsite monitoring conducted to verify the
implementation and effectiveness of corrective action approved or ordered by the Department to
address findings of noncompliance included in the Chelsea Public Schools Coordinated Program
Review Report issued on February 25, 2004. 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.
Another component of the Department’s Mid-cycle Review is the review of your school district
or charter school's self-assessment in the area of English learner education (ELE). In the
remainder of this letter, please read “district” as meaning “school district or charter school.” The
purpose of this review is to determine whether your district is implementing the significant
changes in M.G.L. Chapter 71A, governing the education of limited English proficient students,
that were adopted by voters by means of Question 2 in 2002. The Department has reviewed your
district’s ELE self-assessment (documentation and any written analysis of compliance) and, based
solely on that self-assessment, is providing you in this report with findings on your ELE program
and the corresponding corrective action to be implemented. Your district is urged to request
technical assistance in relation to any of these findings or this prescribed corrective action from
me or from staff in the Department’s Office of Language Acquisition and Achievement at 781338-3534. ELE guidance documents are available on the Department’s website at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/ell/.
While the Department of Education found your district to have resolved certain noncompliance
issues, others were partially corrected or not addressed at all, or the Department’s onsite team
identified new issues of noncompliance, either noncompliance with special education criteria
added or substantially changed in response to IDEA 2004 or other new noncompliance. Where
the district has failed to implement its approved Corrective Action Plan, the Department views
these findings to be serious.
In all instances where noncompliance has been found, the Department has prescribed corrective
1
action for the district that must be implemented without delay. You will find these requirements
for corrective action included in the attached 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. You must submit your statement of assurance to me by April 24, 2007.
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 781-338-3792.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth M. Young, Ed.D.
Mid-cycle Review Chairperson
Program Quality Assurance Services
Darlene A. Lynch, Director
Program Quality Assurance Services
c:
David P. Driscoll, Commissioner of Education
James E. Dwyer, Chelsea Public Schools School Committee, Chairperson
Dr. Hazel Grenham, District Program Review Follow-up Coordinator
Encl.: Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report
2
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT
Chelsea Public School District
ONSITE MONITORING OF IMPLEMENTATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION AND OF CERTAIN NEW REQUIREMENTS
Date of Coordinated Program Review (CPR): October 27-31, 2003
Date of Coordinated Program Review Corrective Action Plan Approval: August 4, 2004
Dates of Corrective Action Plan Progress Reports: October 1, 2004, February 7, 2005 and July 30, 2005,
Dates of this Mid-cycle Review Onsite Visit: December 11 and 12, 2006
Date of this Report: April 17, 2007
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS REPORT IS IN SEVERAL SECTIONS.
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 1 of 19
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
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
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Partial
The student record review
indicated that student
assessments are not
always being completed
within 30 days, and in
some instances, were
being completed one to
two days prior to the
Team Meeting. Therefore,
not affording parents the
opportunity to receive
summary assessment
reports at least two days
prior to the Team
meeting.
The district needs to submit
evidence of an internal
monitoring system to ensure
ongoing implementation of this
requirement. Please submit a
narrative summary of the
monitoring activities that will
be conducted, including the
person(s) responsible, the
results, and any additional
corrective action steps taken.
Please submit this by June 29,
2007.
Special Ed.
Criteria Cited
in CPR Report
and Monitored
in Mid-cycle
SE 4
Report of
Assessments
Partial
Student record
review
SE 9
Timelines for
Eligibility
Yes
Student record
review, staff
interviews and
The district documentation
and student records
demonstrated that while
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 2 of 19
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
SE 15
Child Find
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination
that Corrective Action
was Implemented and
has been Effective

Yes
documentation
this district is failing to
complete student
evaluations within 30 days
as noted under SE 4, Team
Meeting are held within
forty-five school working
days after receipt of the
parent's written consent to
an initial evaluation or a
re-evaluation. The school
district determines whether
the student is eligible for
special education and
provides to the parent
either a proposed IEP or a
written explanation of the
finding of no eligibility.
Documentation
and staff
interviews
The district has a process
in place for continuous
outreach to community
groups and organizations
from which students in
need of special education
may be expected, or which
would include students in
need of special education.
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
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 3 of 19
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination
that Corrective Action
was Implemented and
has been Effective

SE 16
Screening
Yes
Documentation
and staff
interviews
SE 17
Initiation of
Services at 3
years and
Early
Intervention
Partial
Documentation,
student record
review and staff
interviews
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
Partial
Interviews and student
records indicated that
when the district receives
referrals for young
children, IEPs are not
always developed in time
to implement the IEP by
the date of the child’s
third birthday.
The district must review its
policies and procedures related
to initiation of services for
students turning three years
old. Please indicate what
elements were reviewed who
was part of the review process
and any changes initiated as a
result of the district’s internal
review. Please submit this to
the Department by June 29,
2007.
The district has an
established process for
preschool screenings
consistent with the
requirements.
The district is also required to
submit evidence that it has
instituted an internal
monitoring process to ensure
ongoing implementation of this
requirement. Please submit a
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 4 of 19
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
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
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
narrative summary of the
monitoring activities that will
be conducted, including the
person(s) responsible, the
results (i.e. the rate of
compliance with this standard),
and any additional corrective
action steps taken. Please
submit this by June 29, 2007.
SE 18A
IEP
Development
and Content
Yes
Student record
review, staff
interviews and
documentation
The onsite activities of the
Department confirmed that
once a student is
determined eligible for
special education, the
Team, including the parent,
develops an IEP at the
Team meeting using the
evaluation data to guide
the development of
measurable, annual goals
for the student.
SE 18B
Placement and
Provision of
Yes
Student record
review and staff
interviews
Interviews and student
records demonstrated that
the district’s procedures
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 5 of 19
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
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
ensure that the student is
appropriately placed and
that the parent is provided
the IEP as required.
IEP
SE 21
School
Day/School
Tear
Yes
Staff interviews
and
documentation
Student records
demonstrated that the
Team routinely considers
the need for an educational
program that is less than or
more than the regular
school day or school year.
SE 24
Notice
Yes
Student record
review
The student records
demonstrated that the
district consistently
provides notice to parents
regarding the district’s
proposal or refusal to
initiate or change the
identification, evaluation,
or educational placement
of the child.
SE 34
Yes
Student record
District documentation and
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 6 of 19
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination
that Corrective Action
was Implemented and
has been Effective

review, staff
interviews and
documentation
Continuum of
Services
SE 35
Assistive
Technology
Partial
Student record
review and staff
interviews
SE 41
Age Span
Requirements
Yes
Staff interviews
and
documentation
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
Partial
There was no evidence in
student records or IEPs
that assistive technology
is routinely considered for
each student eligible for
special education.
Please conduct and submit
evidence of a review with
Team Chairpersons and lead
Special Education Teachers
regarding the consideration of
assistive technology for all
students. Please provide an
agenda, material and
attendance sheet for this review
to the Department by June 29,
2007.
student records indicated
that the district provides, or
arranges for the provision,
of services for students in
need of special education.
The district submitted class
rosters from December
2006 that demonstrated
that no class had students
where the ages of the
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 7 of 19
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
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
youngest and oldest child
in any instructional
grouping differed by more
than forty-eight months.
SE 48
FAPE
Yes
Student record
review, staff
interviews and
documentation
The Department’s
activities indicated that all
students have equal
opportunity to participate
in the academic program,
educational, nonacademic,
extracurricular and
ancillary programs.
SE 53
Paraprofession
-als
Yes
Staff interviews
and
documentation
Documentation and staff
interviews indicated that
paraprofessionals are
appropriately trained to
assist in providing special
education or related
services.
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 8 of 19
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Special
Education
Criteria
created or
revised in
response to
IDEA-2004
SE 6 ##1 - 3
Determination
of Transition
Services
Yes
Student
record
review and
staff
interviews
SE 8
IEP Team
composition
and attendance
Yes
Student
record
Review and
staff
interviews
Student records demonstrated
that the Team discusses the
student’s transition needs
annually beginning when the
student is 15 years old. Student
records also demonstrated that
there are transition goal in the
IEP for the student as
appropriate, transition service as
needed and that these are
determined based on student
need and preference.
Student records and staff
member interviews
demonstrated that IEP Teams
are comprised of all required
members.
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 9 of 19
*Please note that consistent with
the recently enacted IDEA 2004
regulations, the transition planning
chart will become a mandated
form, which should be maintained
with the student’s IEP. Refer to
Administrative Advisory SPED
2007-1 for guidance. The
Department has revised this form,
please check the Department’s
Special Education website for
updates. Please review the new
requirements for transition
planning and services with
appropriate staff. No additional
progress report is required.
SE 12
Frequency of
re-evaluation
SE 13
Progress
Reports and
content
Yes
Yes
Student
record
review
Student
record
review
Documentation and student
records demonstrated that the
district was conducting student
re-evaluations every three years
as required and when the district
suspects that the student may no
longer need services.
Student records demonstrated
that parents are receiving
progress reports as often as
report cards are issued.
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 10 of 19
*Please note that IDEA 2004
regulations have now changed the
content requirements for IEP
progress reports. Refer to
Administrative Advisory SPED
2007-1 for guidance. The
Department has revised the
progress report form, please check
the Department’s Special
Education website at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/iep
/eng_toc.html. Please review the
new requirements with all
appropriate staff. No additional
progress report is required.
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

SE 14
Review and
revision of
IEPs
Yes
SE 25B
Resolution of
disputes
Yes
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Student
record
review and
staff
interviews
Student records demonstrated
that at least annually, on or
before the anniversary date of
the implementation of the IEP, a
Team meeting is held to
consider the student’s progress
and to review, revise, or develop
a new IEP or refer the student
for a re-evaluation, as
appropriate.
Student
record
review,
documentation and staff
interviews
District documentation and
student records demonstrated
that within 15 days of receiving
notice that a parent has made an
official hearing request to
Special Education Appeals, the
district convenes a meeting with
the parent and the relevant
members of the IEP Team,
including a representative of the
district with decision-making
authority, to try to resolve the
dispute.
Criterion
Determined
to be
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 11 of 19
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
SE 33
Involvement in
the General
Curriculum
Yes
Student
record
review, staff
interviews
and
documentation
SE 39A
Procedures for
services to
eligible private
school students
whose parents
reside in the
district
Yes
Documentation and staff
interviews
District documentation and staff
member interviews indicated
that district staff members
understand the rights of students
with disabilities to be full
participants in the general
curriculum and in the IEP the
district documents the student’s
participation in the general
curriculum.
The district has procedures to
serve eligible private school
students whose parents reside in
the district.
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 12 of 19
SE 39B
Procedures for
services to
eligible
students in
private schools
in the district
whose parents
reside out of
state
Yes
Documentation and staff
interviews
The district has procedures to
serve eligible private school
students whose parents reside
out of state, however the district
noted that there are no student’s
in this category within the
district.
SE 46
Procedures for
suspension of
students with
disabilities
more than 10
days
Yes
Documentation and staff
interviews
The district has procedures for
the suspension of students with
disabilities when suspensions
exceed 10 consecutive school
days or a pattern has developed
for suspensions exceeding 10
cumulative days. These
procedures clearly outline the
responsibilities of the Team and
the district and are consistent
with federal requirements.
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 13 of 19
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
MOA 10A
Handbooks
and Code of
Conduct
Yes
Documentation
Documentation submitted
indicated that all handbooks and
the code of conduct meet state
and federal requirements.
MOA 11A
Liaison and
Grievance
Procedures
Yes
Documentation
District documentation
demonstrated that the district
has designated a staff member
to serve as the coordinator for
compliance for the district’s
responsibilities under Title IX,
Section 504, and Title II.
Additionally, the district has
grievance procedures for
students and for employees
providing for the prompt and
equitable resolution of
complaints alleging
discrimination based on gender
or disability.
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
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
Civil Rights
(MOA) and
Other General
Education
Requirements
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 14 of 19
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
MOA 21
Civil Rights
Training
Yes
Documentation
District documentation
indicated that the district
provides annual in-service
training for all school personnel
regarding their civil rights
responsibilities.
MOA 22
Accessibility
Yes
Documentation and staff
interviews
The district no longer uses the
Tudor Hill building to house the
Alternative School program.
MOA 25
Institutional
SelfEvaluation
Yes
Documentation and staff
interviews
District documentation
demonstrated that the district
conducts a routine institutional
self-evaluation.
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 15 of 19
Chelsea Public School District
English Learner Education (ELE) Requirements
Mid-Cycle Review Findings and Corrective Action Based on the Department’s Review Of Local Self-Assessments
(Please refer to full text of 2006-2007 CPR requirements for ELE and related implementation guidance at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/instrument/chapter71A.doc )
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

ELE 1
Annual
Assessment
Implemented
ELE 2
MCAS
Participation
Implemented
ELE 3
Initial
Identification
Implemented
ELE 4
Waiver
Procedures
Implemented
Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 16 of 19
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
ELE 5
Program
Placement
and Structure
ELE 6
Program Exit
and
Readiness
ELE 7
Parent
Involvement
ELE 8
Declining
Entry to a
Program
ELE 9
Instructional
Grouping
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
Implemented
Implemented
Implemented
Implemented
Implemented
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 17 of 19
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

ELE 10
Parental
Notification
Implemented
ELE 11
Equal Access
to Academic
Programs
and Services
ELE 12
Equal Access
to
Nonacademic
and
Extracurricular
Programs
Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
Implemented
Implemented
ELE 13
Follow-up
Support
Implemented
ELE 14
Licensure
Requirements
Implemented
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 18 of 19
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

ELE 15
Professional
Development
Requirements
Implemented
ELE 16
Equitable
Facilities
Implemented
ELE 17
Program
Evaluation
Implemented
ELE 18
Records of
LEP
Students(To be
reviewed
during next
CPR visit.)
Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
Implemented
Chelsea Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 17, 2007
Page 19 of 19
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting