Massachusetts Department of
Elementary and Secondary Education
350 Main Street, Malden, Massachusetts 02148-5023
Telephone: (781) 338-30
TTY: N.E.T. Relay 1-800-439-2370
May 19, 2008
Margaret Strojny
Superintendent
East Bridgewater Public Schools
11 Plymouth Street
East Bridgewater, MA 02333
Re: Mid-cycle Report
Dear Superintendent Strojny:
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 May 11, 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.
While the Department of Elementary and Secondary 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, 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.
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 2, 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
Richard Taylor, Supervisor
Program Quality Assurance Services
C:
Nancy Miller, Local Program Review Coordinator
Darlene A. Lynch, Director, Program Quality Assurance Services
Encl. Progress Report Review Report
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY
EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE REPORT
East Bridgewater School District
Date of Coordinated Program Review (CPR) Final Report: May 11, 2005
Date Coordinated Program Review Corrective Action Approved or Ordered: November 18, 2005
Dates of Corrective Action Plan Progress Reports: March 20, 2006, May 3, 2007, July 27, 2007, November 15, 2007
Dates of this Mid-cycle Review Onsite Visit: March 5 and 6, 2008
Date of this Report: May 19, 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
Record Review
The record review indicates that
the district documented the age
of majority decision at 18 and
the documentation contained the
required signatures.

SE 7
Age of
Majority
Partial
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 record review
indicates that the district
did not always document
the age of majority
discussion at the Team
meeting of a 17 year old.
The district must provide
training to responsible high
school staff members on the
requirement that beginning one
year prior to a student reaching
the age of 18 the IEP must
include a statement that the
student has been informed of
the transfer of rights at the age
of majority.
By October 15, 2008, the
East Bridgewater Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 19, 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

SE 18B
Placement

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
The N1 notice provided to
the parent when the
district proposes an IEP
does not always contain
answers to the guiding
questions on page two of
the N1 form.
Interviews indicate that
some high school students
have schedules that
indicate they are out of
the regular education
setting for more than 20
percent of the time, their
East Bridgewater Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 19, 2008
Page 2 of 11
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
district must provide a copy of
the training agenda, a sign in
sheet and a copy of any
handouts. The district must
develop and provide a plan to
monitor IEPs to ensure that
they have the required
information.
By January 15, 2009, the
district must provide a report
of how many IEPs were
reviewed, the rate of
compliance, and steps taken to
correct any noncompliance
found.
The district must provide
training to responsible staff
members on the requirement to
address all questions on page 2
of the N1 form when proposing
an IEP or assessment.
By October 15, 2008, the
district must provide a copy of
the training agenda, a sign in
sheet and a copy of any
handouts. The district must
develop and provide a plan to
monitor the content of N1
forms to ensure that they have
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
IEP, however, describes
their placement as full
inclusion.
the required information.
By January 15, 2009, the
district must provide a report
of how many records were
reviewed and the rate of
compliance, and steps taken to
correct any noncompliance
found..
The district must review the
IEPs of high school students to
ensure that the placement
described on the PL1 form
correctly reflects the students
program. By January 15,
2009, the district must report
on the number of IEPs
reviewed, the rate of
compliance, and steps taken to
correct any noncompliance
found.
East Bridgewater Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 19, 2008
Page 3 of 11
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
Criterion
Method(s)
Basis of Determination that
Criterion
Basis of Determination
Required Corrective Action,
Number
Implemented
of
Criterion was Implemented
Partially
that Criterion was
Timelines for

and
Verification
Implemented Partially Implemented
Implementation, and
Topic
or Not
or Not Implemented
Progress Reporting
Implemented

SE 3
Special
requirements
for
determination
of specific
learning
disability
SE 6 ##1 - 3
Determination
of Transition
Services
SE 8
IEP Team
composition
and attendance

Record
Review

Record
Review

Record
review and
interviews
The record review indicates the
district addresses the special
requirements for documenting
the determination of specific
learning disabilities.
Interviews and documentation
indicate that the district
discusses the students’ transition
needs annually beginning no
later than when the student is 15
years old and documents the
discussion on the most recent
copy of the transition form.
Record review and interviews
indicate that the district has the
required Team composition and
attendance at Team meetings.
Record review also indicates
that when a Team member
cannot be present, parent
East Bridgewater Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 19, 2008
Page 4 of 11
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
SE 12
Frequency of
re-evaluation
SE 13
Progress
Reports and
content
Criterion
Implemented


Partial
Method(s)
of
Verification
Record
review and
interviews
Record
Reviews
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

agreement to this absence would
be documented and the absent
member would submit
information in writing.
Record review and interviews
indicate that the re-evaluation is
conducted every three years
unless the parent and district
agree that it is not necessary.
Record review indicates that
progress reports are submitted
with the required frequency and
that they contain the required
information.
Partial
Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Record review indicates
that the Team does not
always meet to revise an
IEP when reports indicate
a lack of progress.
The district must provide
training on the requirement to
meet to revise an IEP when
progress reports indicate a lack
of progress.
By October 15, 2008, the
district must provide a copy of
the training agenda, a sign in
sheet and a copy of any
handouts. The district must
develop and provide a plan to
monitor progress reports to
ensure that the required steps
are taken when they reflect a
lack of progress.
By January 15, 2009, the
district must provide a report
of how many student records
were reviewed, the rate of
compliance, and steps taken to
correct any noncompliance
found.
East Bridgewater Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 19, 2008
Page 5 of 11
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
SE 14
Review and
revision of
IEPs
SE 20
LRE
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Record
review and
interviews

Record
review

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Record review and
interviews indicate that
amendments were
incorrectly used to extend
the date of the IEP, which
resulted in IEPs not being
reviewed before their
expiration.
The district must provide
training to staff members on
the requirement to review the
IEP annually, on or before the
anniversary date of the IEP.
By October 15, 2008, the
district must provide a copy of
the training agenda, a sign in
sheet and a copy of any
handouts. The district must
develop and provide a plan to
monitor IEPs to ensure that
they have been reviewed prior
to their expiration.
By January 15, 2009, the
district must provide a report
of how many IEPs were
reviewed, the rate of
compliance, and steps taken to
correct any noncompliance
found.
The district must provide
training to responsible school
staff members on the
requirement to justify the
removal of students from
regular education.
By October 15, 2008, the
district must provide a copy of
Although the district
provided justification for
the removal of students in
the regular education
setting, the record review
indicated that the nonparticipation justification
statement did not always
East Bridgewater Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 19, 2008
Page 6 of 11
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
SE 25B
Resolution of
disputes
SE 33
Involvement in
the General
Curriculum
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification

Record
review and
interviews

Record
review and
interviews
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
provide the required
information. The Team
did not always state why
the removal is critical to
the student’s program and
the basis for removing the
student from the least
restrictive environment.
the training agenda, a sign in
sheet and a copy of any
handouts. The district must
develop and provide a plan to
monitor IEPs to ensure that
they have the required
information justifying why the
removal of a student from
regular education is critical.
By January 15, 2009, the
district must provide a report
of how many IEPs were
reviewed, the rate of
compliance, and steps taken to
correct any noncompliance
found.
Interviews and documentation
indicate that the district will
agree to participate in a
resolution session prior to a
hearing. A copy of a legally
binding document was provided
to the Department for review.
Interviews indicate that all
students are taught by teachers
who have an understating of the
Massachusetts Curriculum
Frameworks model. Also,
documentation indicates that
regular education teachers are
consistently present at the Team
East Bridgewater Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 19, 2008
Page 7 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

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
meetings.
SE 39A
Procedures for
services to
eligible private
school students
whose parents
reside in the
district
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

Documentation

Documentation and
interviews

Record
review and
interviews
Documentation indicates that
the district completed the
proportionate share worksheet
and that they have procedures in
place for providing services to
students who are enrolled in
private schools at private
expense.
There are no private schools in
the district.
Documentation indicates that
the district has a procedure in
place to accurately determine
the number of suspensions for
students eligible for special
education. Records and
interviews indicate that there is
a procedure in place to meet the
requirements for a manifestation
determination. Interviews
East Bridgewater Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 19, 2008
Page 8 of 11
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
indicate that students in Interim
Alternative Settings have access
to IEP services and academic
tutoring.
SE 52
Appropriate
certifications/
licenses or
other
credentials –
related service
providers
(related only to
those providing
interpreting
services)

Interviews
Interviews indicate that the
district does not employ those
who provide interpreting
services for the deaf and hard of
hearing.
East Bridgewater Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 19, 2008
Page 9 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
Criterion
Method(s)
Basis of Determination that
Criterion
Basis of Determination
Required Corrective Action,
Number
Implemented
of
Criterion was Implemented
Partially
that Criterion was
Timelines for

and
Verification
Implemented Partially Implemented
Implementation, and
Topic
or Not
or Not Implemented
Progress Reporting
Implemented

All students at the high
The district must review the
SE 34

school level have IEPs
IEPs of high school students
Continuum of
that describe their
and determine if the
Alternative
placement as full
description of their placement
Placements
inclusion. However,
is consistent with their IEP.
and Services
some students have
By October 15, 2008, the
schedules that indicate
district must report to the
they are out of the regular Department the number of
education setting for more IEPs with incorrect placements
than 20 percent of the
and a description of the steps
time.
taken to correct the placement
pages of those IEPs.
Interviews and
By August 15, 2008, the
SE 55

observations indicate that
district must provide a plan
Special
the
spaces
allocated
for
that will ensure that all service
Education
special education students providers have a designated
Facilities and
does not minimize
space to provide services. All
Classrooms
stigmatization in that
spaces must minimize
services are provided in
stigmatization and be at least
hallways and small
equal in all physical respects to
closets. At the elementary the average standards of
level, special education
general education.
service providers are not
provided with a
designated space and must
seek out unused space in
order to provide services.
East Bridgewater Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 19, 2008
Page 10 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
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

ELE 11
Equal Access
to Academic
Programs and

Method(s)
of
Verification
Documentation and
interviews
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
Students who are identified as
LEP receive services from a
certified ESL teacher are taught
by teachers who have received
instruction in sheltered content
instruction in Category 1 and
Category 2. LEP students have
access to all programs and
services, many of which are
receiving Title 1 services, and
there is one student being
considered for special education
eligibility. The district provides
interpreting services for parents
who require it and they are in
the process of translating school
documents.
East Bridgewater Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 19, 2008
Page 11 of 11
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements