COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
MID-CYCLE REPORT
Charter School: Christa McAuliffe Regional Charter School
MCR Onsite Dates: 11/01/2012
Program Area: Special Education
Mitchell D. Chester, Ed.D.
Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
MID-CYCLE REPORT
SE Criterion # 3 - Special requirements for determination of specific
learning disability
Rating:
Partially Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Record review and interviews indicated that when making a determination of Specific
Learning Disability (SLD), Teams use the ED 1, the Determination of Special Education
Eligibility flowchart, to document the student’s disability designation. Record review showed
that the school’s IEP Teams are not completing the required written eligibility determination
form or the four components used to determine eligibility: Historic review and educational
assessment (SLD 1), Area of concern and evaluation method (SLD 2), Exclusionary factors
(SLD 3) and Observation (SLD 4) for students suspected of having a specific learning
disability.
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Please ensure that IEP Team chairpersons are trained in the appropriate development of the
four required components and written determination for documenting a determination of
Specific Learning Disability. Please use the Department’s guidance at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/iep/sld/default.html as the basis of this training.
Please develop an internal system of periodic review for the completion of all required
components of the SLD eligibility process and identify the person(s) responsible by name and
title for this internal monitoring.
Please conduct a student record review for evidence that SLD components are appropriately
completed and in student records. This sample must be drawn from records of students
evaluated for determination of SLD from a cross-section of all grade levels subsequent to the
completion of the school’s corrective actions.
*Please note that when conducting internal monitoring the district must maintain the following
documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of student
names and grade level for the record review; b) Date of the review; c) who conducted the
review, their role(s), and their signature(s).
Required Elements of Progress Reports:
Submit evidence of staff training, including an agenda, training materials, and signed
attendance sheets, indicating name and role of staff. Please submit this progress report by
May 3, 2013.
Submit a description of the oversight system and identify the person(s) responsible for
monitoring the completion of the SLD components, including the date of the system's
implementation and the staff responsible for the review. Please submit this progress report by
May 3, 2013.
Submit a report of the results of an 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.
Submit by October 18, 2013.
Progress Report Due Date(s):
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
Christa McAuliffe Regional Charter Public (District) Mid-Cycle Report – March 18, 2013 12:33:12 PM
Page 2 of 6
05/03/2013
10/18/2013
SE Criterion # 6 - Determination of transition services
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Student record review and staff interviews indicated that the school’s IEP Teams discuss
transition needs annually beginning when students are 14 years old, and students are
consistently invited to Team meetings to provide input. Record review also demonstrated that
IEP Teams document their discussion on the Transition Planning Form, which was
consistently found in student records.
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:
This criterion is not applicable, as Christa McAuliffe Regional Charter School serves middle
school students only.
SE Criterion # 8 - IEP Team composition and attendance
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Student record review indicated that required Team members consistently attend IEP
meetings. The school has procedures to obtain parents’ written permission to excuse a
required Team member when the Team member is unable to attend; and to obtain the
excused Team member’s input for the development of the IEP in advance of the Team
meeting. Record review showed that the school invites students beginning at age 14 to Team
meetings to discuss transition services. Document review also demonstrated that the school
has a process to excuse team members whose areas are not being modified or discussed at
the Team meeting.
SE Criterion # 13 - Progress Reports and content
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Record review and interviews demonstrated that parents are sent IEP progress reports with
the same frequency as grade reports. Progress reports were consistently in student files and
addressed student progress toward annual IEP goals.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
Christa McAuliffe Regional Charter Public (District) Mid-Cycle Report – March 18, 2013 12:33:12 PM
Page 3 of 6
SE Criterion # 14 - Review and revision of IEPs
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Record review indicated that the school’s Teams consistently convene annual IEP meetings
on or before the anniversary date of IEPs, so that Teams can review the students’ progress
and revise or develop a new IEP or refer the student for a re-evaluation.
SE Criterion # 18A - IEP development and content
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Student records, document review, and staff interviews demonstrated that the school’s IEP
Teams routinely discuss whether bullying, harassment, or teasing is an issue for students
whose disability made him or her vulnerable to bullying, harassment, or teasing or for
students whose evaluations indicate a disability that affects social skills development. Record
review demonstrated that when these students need support, the school develops and
documents appropriate IEP goals and services to address the skills and proficiencies needed
to avoid and respond to bullying, harassment, or teasing.
Student records, document review and interviews demonstrated that for students identified
with a disability on the autism spectrum, the school’s IEP Teams specifically address the
students’ social skills and communication challenges with peers and staff. For these
students, IEP Teams develop and document appropriate IEP goals and services to address
the skills and proficiencies needed to avoid and respond to bullying, harassment, or teasing.
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:
Record review and interviews indicated that the required Notice of Proposed School District
Action (N1) is consistently provided to parents with the proposed IEP. Additionally, record
review and interviews indicated that the IEP Team’s decisions and considerations, along with
rejected options and any reasons for the rejection, evaluation procedures, and other relevant
factors, are documented and provided to the parents.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
Christa McAuliffe Regional Charter Public (District) Mid-Cycle Report – March 18, 2013 12:33:12 PM
Page 4 of 6
SE Criterion # 25 - Parental consent
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Record review indicated that consented-to evaluations and observations are consistently
completed by the school, and that the school always obtains parental consent before
conducting student evaluations.
Staff interviews indicated that within the past two years, no parent/guardian has exercised his
or her right of revocation after consenting to a student’s special education services. The
charter school has a process in place so that when a parent revokes consent in writing, the
school will promptly provide the parent with a written notice of the school’s proposal to
discontinue services, as well as how the parent can obtain a copy of his/her right to
procedural safeguards. This notice would be provided within a reasonable time before
discontinuing the student’s services. According to its procedures, the charter school will not
use mediation or a due process hearing to overrule the parent’s revocation request.
SE Criterion # 26 - Parent participation in meetings
Rating:
Partially Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Student records and interviews indicated that in cases where parents cannot attend
scheduled IEP meetings, the district documents its attempts to re-schedule the meeting to
facilitate the parents' participation. The district, however, does not use other methods of
ensuring participation, such as individual or conference calls or video conferencing, to involve
parents when they cannot attend a Team meeting.
Department Order of Corrective Action:
Please develop a set of procedures to address parent participation in IEP Team meetings that
includes providing alternate methods of participation, such as individual or conference phone
calls. Provide training to IEP Team chairpersons on these revised parent participation
procedures.
Please develop an internal system of periodic review for ensuring that when parents are
unable to attend at Team meetings, other methods, such as individual or conference calls or
video conferencing are used to involve parents. Please identify the person(s) responsible by
name and title for this internal monitoring.
Please conduct a student record review for evidence that when parents cannot attend a Team
meeting, the school will use another method to ensure the parents’ participation. This sample
must be drawn from records of students where Team meetings were re-scheduled or where
parents did not attend Team meetings, subsequent to the completion of the school’s
corrective actions.
*Please note that when conducting internal monitoring the district must maintain the following
documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of student
names and grade level for the record review; b) Date of the review; c) Name(s) of staff who
conducted the review, their role(s), and their signature(s).
Required Elements of Progress Reports:
Submit the revised attendance policy and evidence of staff training, including an agenda,
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
Christa McAuliffe Regional Charter Public (District) Mid-Cycle Report – March 18, 2013 12:33:12 PM
Page 5 of 6
SE Criterion # 26 - Parent participation in meetings
training materials, and signed attendance sheets, indicating name and role of staff.
Submit a description of the oversight system to ensure that other methods to involve parents
are used when they cannot attend Team meetings. Include the date of the system's
implementation and the staff responsible for the review.
Please submit this progress report by May 3, 2013.
Submit a report of the results of an 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.
Please submit by October 18, 2013.
Progress Report Due Date(s):
05/03/2013
10/18/2013
SE Criterion # 51 - Appropriate special education teacher licensure
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Document review and interviews demonstrated that Christa McAuliffe Regional Charter
School, as a Commonwealth Charter School, employs only special education teachers who
hold current and valid special education licenses to provide specialized instruction.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
Christa McAuliffe Regional Charter Public (District) Mid-Cycle Report – March 18, 2013 12:33:12 PM
Page 6 of 6