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 July 24, 2006 Dr. Joseph Connors Grafton Public School District 30 Providence Road Grafton, MA 01519 Re: Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report Dear Dr. Connors: Enclosed is the Department of Education's Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report (Mid-Cycle Report). This report contains findings based on onsite monitoring conducted to verify the implementation and effectiveness of corrective action approved by the Department to address findings of noncompliance included in the Grafton Public School District’s Coordinated Program Review Report issued on July 25, 2003. The Mid-cycle Report also contains findings based on onsite monitoring of special education compliance criteria that have been newly created or substantially changed in response to IDEA 2004. As you know, another component of the Department’s Mid-cycle Review is the review of your school district's self-assessment in the area of English learner education (ELE). (In the remainder of this letter, please read “district” as meaning “school district.”) 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 documents and, based solely on that selfassessment, is providing you in this report with comments on your ELE program and, where necessary, corrective action to be implemented. Your district is urged to request technical assistance in relation to any of these comments or prescribed corrective action. To secure assistance, you may consult with your Mid-cycle Review Chairperson or call Robyn Dowling-Grant in Program Quality Assurance Services at 781-338-3732. You may also consult with staff in the Department’s Office of Language Acquisition and Achievement at 781-338-3534 and obtain additional ELE guidance documents through the Department’s web site 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, noncompliance with ELE criteria, 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 action for the district that must be implemented without delay. You will find these requirements for corrective Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 1 of 19 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 school district within the timelines specified. Your statement of assurance must be submitted to the Mid-cycle Review Chairperson by August 17, 2006. Your staff's cooperation throughout these follow-up monitoring activities is appreciated. Should you like clarification of any part of our report, please do not hesitate to contact the Mid-cycle Review Chairperson at 781-338-3756, or my supervisor George Haile at 781- 338- 3780. Sincerely, Christina Gentile, Mid-cycle Review Chairperson Program Quality Assurance Services Darlene A. Lynch, Director Program Quality Assurance Services c: David P. Driscoll, Commissioner of Education Nancy Varello, Grafton School Committee Chairperson Donna Dias, District Program Review Follow-up Coordinator Encl.: Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 2 of 19 MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION MID-CYCLE COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT Grafton Public School District ONSITE VERIFICATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AND/OR IDENTIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL NONCOMPLIANCE REQUIRING CORRECTIVE ACTION Date of Coordinated Program Review (CPR): March 17-21, 2003 Date of Coordinated Program Review Corrective Action Plan Approval: September 30, 2003 Dates of Corrective Action Plan Progress Reports: July 27, 2004; March 14, 2005; December 23, 2005 Dates of this Mid-cycle Review Onsite Visit: May 2-4, 2006 Date of this Report: July 24, 2006 PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS REPORT IS IN SEVERAL SECTIONS. Criterion Number and Topic (Refer to full text of 20052006 CPR Requirements) Approved Corrective Action Determined 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 Special Education Criteria Originally Cited in CPR Report and Monitored in Mid-cycle Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 3 of 19 Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Progress Reporting Criterion Number and Topic (Refer to full text of 20052006 CPR Approved Corrective Action Determined Method(s) of Verification Implemented and Effective Requirements) SE 9/9A Eligibility Determination Partial Interviews Documents Student records SE 15 Outreach by the School District Basis of Determination that Corrective Action was Implemented and has been Effective Interviews Documents The district has a procedure in place regarding the conducting of evaluations, convening IEP Team meetings, and providing a proposed IEP and placement within the mandated timelines. 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 Student record review indicated that the district does not consistently meet the mandated 30-day and 45-day timelines for completing initial evaluations, convening the IEP team, and providing the proposed IEP and placement to the parent/guardian. The district sends a letter to the parents of all 2.5-4.5 year olds, and to daycare, nursery schools, and public agencies, in order to identify children in need of special education services. Additionally, the district posts information on the district’s website, on local cable television, and in local newspapers. The district also sends letters to private schools and collaboratives in the area. Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 4 of 19 Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Progress Reporting Submit the results of a review of student records from the elementary, middle, and high schools regarding the completion of initial eligibility determinations (indicate the number of records reviewed, the number of records where timelines were met, and indicate any further steps taken by the district to address adherence to the timelines for initial eligibility) by December 18, 2006. Criterion Number and Topic (Refer to full text of 20052006 CPR Approved Corrective Action Determined Method(s) of Verification Implemented and Effective Requirements) SE 17 Initiation of Services at Age Three Partial Student records Interviews Documents SE 18A IEP development and content Basis of Determination that Corrective Action was Implemented and has been Effective Partial Student records 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 The district has a policy in place for ensuring that services commence at age 3. The district also participates in transition planning conferences with the referring agency and the parent. Upon receipt of parental consent, the district provides an evaluation, holds a Team meeting, develops an IEP and determines placement for children transitioning from Early Intervention programs. Partial The district should ensure that records of initial evaluations include documentation of an observation. Based on a review of student records, the district does not document observations of children’s interactions in their natural environment or early intervention program. The district regularly drafts IEPs prior to Team meetings. The district ensures that IEP teams fully discuss all elements of draft IEPs during the Team meetings. IEPs are written in language that is generally understandable. Partial Student records indicated that IEPs do not consistently contain individualized measurable goals. Some IEPs contain general goals that all students are expected to meet, such as obtaining passing grades. IEP nonparticipation justification statements often indicate that the student needs pull-out services but not why. Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 5 of 19 Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Progress Reporting Submit the results of a review of student records for children who have been assessed this calendar year to determine eligibility for services at age 3, regarding the completion and documentation of an observation (indicate the number of records reviewed, the number of records where observations were conducted, and indicate any further steps taken by the district to ensure that observations are conducted and documented in student records) by December 18, 2006. Submit the agenda and signed attendance sheets from staff training regarding the development of measurable annual goals and completion of the nonparticipation justification statement. Submit the results of an administrative review of student records and IEPs from the elementary, middle and high schools. Criterion Number and Topic (Refer to full text of 20052006 CPR Requirements) Approved Corrective Action Determined 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 Additionally, district records do not always contain copies of IEPs signed by the district, and sometimes IEPs are missing entirely from student records. IEPs are not always revised and updated from year to year to reflect student progress and needs. Indicate the number of student records reviewed, the number of records with missing or unsigned IEPs, the number of IEPs with annual measurable goals, the number of IEPs with detailed nonparticipation justifications, and the number of records where IEPs were not updated annually to reflect student progress and needs. Include a narrative addressing further action by the district to address any continuing problem areas. Above due December 18, 2006. Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 6 of 19 Criterion Number and Topic (Refer to full text of 20052006 CPR Approved Corrective Action Determined Verification Basis of Determination that Corrective Action was Implemented and has been Effective Implemented and Effective Requirements) SE 28 Parent Provided IEP or Notice of No Eligibility Together with Notification of Procedural Safeguards and Parent’s Rights Partial SE 29/MOA 7 Communications are in English and Primary Language of the Home Method(s) of Documents Student records Interviews Documents Interviews The district generally provides parents with the proposed IEP and placement, or a finding of no eligibility, within the required timelines. The district also provides the Notice of Procedural Safeguards. 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 N-1 forms are not sufficiently complete, and in some cases, do not accompany IEPs at all. Submit the agendas, handout material and signed attendance sheets from staff training regarding the completion of N1s. Not all questions on the N1 are included on the completed form or answered appropriately or at all, and sometimes N1s are undated. Grafton indicated that no families have indicated a need for translation assistance. Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 7 of 19 Submit the results of a review of student records from the elementary, middle, and high schools regarding the completion of N-1 forms (indicate the number of records reviewed, the number of records where N1s were missing, the number of records where N1s were not sufficiently completed, and indicate any further steps taken by the district to address completion of N1s) Above due by December 18, 2006. Criterion Number and Topic (Refer to full text of 20052006 CPR Approved Corrective Action Determined Method(s) of Verification Basis of Determination that Corrective Action was Implemented and has been Effective Implemented and Effective Requirements) SE 49 Related Services Partial Documents Student Records Interviews The district currently provides a number of related services, including speech- language therapy; counseling and psychological services; physical therapy; occupational therapy; orientation and mobility therapy; school nurse services; and parent counseling and training. The district has developed a policy for tracking missed sessions, informing parents of missed sessions, and making up missed sessions of services. The district provided tracking sheets indicating the method used to make up missed services. 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 Interviews indicated that service providers are unclear on what the system-wide procedure is when services are missed. Because of staffing and scheduling concerns, it is often difficult to make services up or to find replacement service providers, especially for speech language pathologists. Documentation and interviews indicated that many missed sessions are due to IEP meetings. Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 8 of 19 Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Progress Reporting Submit the following by December 18, 2006: Evidence that the district’s procedure for making up missed services has been reviewed with all Team chairpersons and service providers. Tracking forms for related service providers for September – December of 2006. Description of the steps taken by the district to address patterns of missed services and to address the reasons for missed services. Schedules for related service providers that show blocks set aside for testing, service delivery, IEP Team meetings, and report writing. Criterion Number and Topic (Refer to full text of 20052006 CPR Requirements) Approved Corrective Action Determined Method(s) of Verification Basis of Determination that Corrective Action was Implemented and has been Effective Implemented and 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 Review of student records revealed that students’ IEPs do not always include transition goals and transition services. Additionally, students’ vocational goals are not consistently measurable. See SE 18A regarding the inclusion of measurable goals. Basis of Determination Required Corrective Action, Special Education Criteria created or revised in response to IDEA-2004 SE 6 Determination of Transition Services Partial Interviews Documents Student Records Criterion Approved Method(s) The district has in place the “Pathways” and “Directions” programs for special education students 14-18 years and 18-22 years, respectively. The programs emphasize vocational training and job placement. Based on documentation and student records, the district incorporates transition goals and services into IEPs beginning at age 15, for most students. Additionally, the district ensures that the vision statement is based on student preferences and interests. 688 referrals are made when appropriate. Team Chairpersons have begun to use the Transition Planning Chart. Students are participating in on and off-campus job placements. Basis of Determination that Partial Corrective Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 9 of 19 Submit the results of an administrative review of IEPs regarding the inclusion and measurability of transition goals and services in students’ IEPs (include the number of IEPs reviewed, the number of IEPs with transition goals and/or services and the number of IEPs with vocational goals that are not measurable, and indicate any further steps taken by the district to address the lack of transition planning and goals in students’ IEPs) by December 18, 2006. Number and Topic (Refer to full text of 20052006 CPR Corrective Action Determined of Verification Corrective Action was Implemented and has been Effective Implemented and Effective Requirements) SE 8 IEP Team Composition and Attendance Student Records Documents Action Not Implemented or Not Effective Or New Issues Identified that Implementation of Corrective Action was Incomplete or Ineffective Or Basis of Finding of New Noncompliance The district has a local monitoring policy in place addressing IEP Team composition and attendance. The district provided a list of individuals authorized to commit the district’s resources. Student records indicated that the district ensures that all required members of the Team are present for IEP meetings. At the high school level, students age fourteen and older and adult human service agencies, when appropriate, are invited to Team meetings. SE 12 Frequency of Re-evaluation Student records The district regularly adheres to the mandated timelines for conducting re-evaluations. Interviews Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 10 of 19 Timelines for Implementation, and Progress Reporting Criterion Number and Topic (Refer to full text of 20052006 CPR Approved Corrective Action Determined Method(s) of Verification Basis of Determination that Corrective Action was Implemented and has been Effective Implemented and Effective Requirements) SE 13 Progress Reports and content Partial Interviews Student Records Progress reports are provided to parents four times a year, in accordance with the report card cycle. In most cases, progress reports address all goals and whether the student is making sufficient progress to meet the goal in question. 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 Student record review indicated that IEP Teams do not always reconcene when a student is not making progress. Interviews indicated that team chairpersons and special education liaisons are unclear regarding their individual roles and responsibilities for monitoring student progress, both with respect to IEP goals and progress in the general education classroom, especially at the high school level. Additionally, there is no mechanism for reviewing progress reports before they are sent to parents. Submit a revised procedure for tracking and monitoring student progress. Include how the district will ensure that IEP Teams meet when a student is not making progress; the key personnel who are responsible for monitoring students’ general progress; and the key personnel who are responsible for reviewing progress reports before they are sent out. Also submit an administrative review of progress reports written at the high school. Include how many progress reports were reviewed, how many indicated no progress, and in how many cases there was a follow-up IEP Team meeting to address the lack of progress. Submit the above by December 18, 2006. Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 11 of 19 Criterion Number and Topic (Refer to full text of 20052006 CPR Approved Corrective Action Determined Method(s) of Verification Basis of Determination that Corrective Action was Implemented and has been Effective Implemented and Effective Requirements) SE 14 Review and Revision of IEPs Student Records The district reviews IEPs at least annually and uses amendments appropriately. The district submitted its “September 2005 revised procedures for immediate delivery of IEP.” SE 25B Resolution of disputes Documents Documentation submitted by the district indicates that the district has not yet needed to convene a resolution session. SE 30 Notice of Procedural Safeguards Interviews Documents 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 The district sends out the Notice of Procedural Safeguards with each annual IEP, the Evaluation Consent Form, and no later than the date on which the district decides to take disciplinary action that results in a student’s change of placement. Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 12 of 19 Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Progress Reporting Criterion Number and Topic (Refer to full text of 20052006 CPR Approved Corrective Action Determined Method(s) of Verification Basis of Determination that Corrective Action was Implemented and has been Effective Implemented and Effective Requirements) SE 46 Procedures for suspension of students with disabilities more than 10 days Documents Student Records 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 The district conducts manifestation determinations before students’ 10th day of suspension. The district submitted a description of the interim alternative educational settings used by the district. The district submitted handbooks for the Elementary School, Middle School, and High School, all of which contained disciplinary procedures for students with special needs. Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 13 of 19 Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Progress Reporting Criterion Number and Topic (Refer to full text of 20052006 CPR Requirements) Approved Corrective Action Determined Method(s) of Verification Basis of Determination that Corrective Action was Implemented and has been Effective Implemented and 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 Civil Rights (MOA) and Other General Education Requirements MOA 1 Identification of LEP Students Partial Student Records See ELE 1 & 3. Partial See ELE 5. Partial Documents Interviews MOA 2 Program Modifications and Support Services for LEP Students Partial MOA 10A Student Handbooks and codes of conduct Partial Criterion Student Records Documents Interviews Approved Documents Method(s) The district submitted student handbooks for the Elementary School, Middle School, and High School. All handbooks contain a code of conduct that addresses due process procedures and discipline procedures for special education students. Additionally, all handbooks contain a nondiscrimination policy and harassment policy. Basis of Determination that Partial The harassment/grievance policy does not include protection for religion. The policy also does not include timelines for a written response. Identify specific timelines for written responses to grievances and evidence of communication of the same to staff and parents. Submit an updated harassment/grievance policy that includes all required elements. Submit the above by December 18, 2006. Corrective Basis of Determination Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 14 of 19 Required Corrective Action, Number and Topic (Refer to full text of 20052006 CPR Corrective Action Determined of Verification Corrective Action was Implemented and has been Effective Implemented and Effective Requirements) MOA 11A Designation of liaison/ coordinator(s) Partial Documents Partial Documents See MOA 10A and 11A. MOA 21 Staff training regarding civil rights responsibilities Documents The district submitted training material and attendance sheets for staff training on civil rights responsibilities, specifically harassment. MOA 25 Institutional self-evaluation MOA 12A Annual and continuous notification of nondiscrimination and coordinators The district has designated individuals to serve as Title VI Coordinator, Title IX Coordinator, and Harassment/Grievance Officer. The Middle School handbook includes a policy for homeless students. Action Not Implemented or Not Effective Or New Issues Identified that Implementation of Corrective Action was Incomplete or Ineffective Or Basis of Finding of New Noncompliance Partial The High School and Elementary School handbooks do not include a homeless policy. Additionally, there is no identification of a Homeless Coordinator. Partial Apart from handbooks, the district did not submit documentation pertaining to this criterion, such as copies of employment applications. The district submitted a Special Education Evaluation from the 2004-2005 school year. The district’s Evaluation was based on a survey consisting of 21 questions, to which 137 parents responded. Additionally, the district submitted the timeline for the School Committee’s review of policies. Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 15 of 19 Timelines for Implementation, and Progress Reporting Submit an updated homeless policy to be included in the High School and Elementary School handbooks. Include a designation of the Homeless Coordinator. Submit the above by December 18, 2006. Submit documentation, including employment applications, demonstrating compliance with this criterion by December 18, 2006. Submit documentation of a district review, for all staff, on grievance procedures and staff responsibilities as a mandated reporter by December 18, 2006. Grafton Public School District English Learner Education (ELE) Requirements Mid-Cycle Review Comments and Corrective Action Based on the Department’s Review Of Local Self-Assessments (Please refer to full text of 2005-2006 CPR-ELE legal requirements and related implementation guidance at http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/instrument/chapter71A.doc ) ELE Criterion Number and Topic ELE 1 Annual Assessment ELE 2 MCAS Participation ELE 3 Initial Identification Comments Based on the Department’s Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Progress Reporting The district annually assesses the English proficiency for all LEP students by administering the MEPA and MELA-O. Limited English Proficient (“LEP”) students participate in MCAS, and have access to bilingual dictionaries when necessary. It is unclear whether the district has written guidelines that include clear criteria to determine whether students are or are not LEP. The district administers a Home Language Survey to incoming students; however, the survey is not available in parents’ home languages. The district does not have effective identification procedures, as interviews indicated that not all LEP students are identified. Interviews and student records indicated that students are sometimes determined to be LEP solely based on the results of the Home Language Survey without any assessments. Additionally, student records and documents (“Identification Process Overview”) reflected that the MELA-O is sometimes used to identify students as LEP, and that students are not always initially assessed in the four areas of reading, writing, speaking and listening. Several of the district’s documents, including “Teaching ESL Students in Sheltered English Immersion Classrooms in the Grafton Public Schools,” inaccurately describe the identification process for LEP students. Submit the following documentation by December 18, 2006. Samples of Home Language Surveys that have been translated into the major languages represented in the district. Revised procedures that describe the identification and assessment process for LEP students, including the criteria for making a determination of LEP status, and what assessments will be completed for identification purposes. List of newly enrolled students whose first language is not English; the results of their Home Language Survey; their LEP status; and what assessments were performed, if any. Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 16 of 19 ELE Criterion Number and Topic ELE 4 Waiver Procedures Comments Based on the Department’s Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Progress Reporting The district provided appropriate waiver application forms for students under 10 years of age and students over 10 years of age. ELE 5 Program Placement and Structure LEP students are placed in general education classrooms rather than Sheltered English Immersion (“SEI”) classrooms. Additionally, not all beginning LEP students receive daily English Language Development (“ELD”), and high school LEP students’ schedules do not reflect any ELD instruction. Not all ELD/ESL tutors/teachers are appropriately certified. Interviews indicated that rather than receiving instruction based on the Massachusetts English Language Proficiency Benchmarks and Outcomes (“ELPBO”), many LEP students are being re-taught classroom material or being assisted with homework. ELE 6 Program Exit and Readiness The district does not re-designate students from LEP to Formerly Limited English Proficient (“FLEP”) until the student is deemed proficient using multiple testing measures; the student is able to participate independently and meaningfully in the mainstream education program; and a Guided Decision Plan is established for monitoring. Submit the following documentation by December 3, 2006: Description of the English language support program in place for students K-12 for the 2006-07 SY. List of LEP students for the 06-07 SY. Indicate the grade level and the classroom placement of each student, the type and amount of English language support that the student needs, and the amount of English Language Development instruction that the student is receiving. Name of teachers participating in sheltered English instruction training for the 06-07 SY. List of ELL tutor/teacher(s) and qualification(s), including copy of current licensure certification and/or waiver. Description of how the district is ensuring that students are receiving instruction based on ELPBO. ELE 7 Parent Involvement Apart from copies of translated handbooks and ELL Parent Handbooks, the district did not submit documentation regarding parent involvement. It is unclear whether the district has developed a process for including parents of LEP students in matters pertaining to the students’ educations. Submit the following documentation by December 18, 2006: Description of the opportunities for parent involvement and methods for parent-teacher communication. Copies of translated notices, announcements, and report cards. ELE 8 Declining Entry to a Program The district has an “opt out” procedure in place. The district indicated that it continues to monitor students’ educational progress. However, based on interviews, the district does not offer supports to students who have declined to enroll in the program. Submit a description of the supports available to students who have declined entry into the program by December 18, 2006. ELE 9 Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 17 of 19 ELE Criterion Number and Topic Instructional Grouping ELE 10 Parental Notification ELE 11 Equal Access to Academic Programs and Services ELE 12 Equal Access to Nonacademic and Extracurricular Programs ELE 13 Follow-up Support ELE 14 Licensure and Fluency Requirements Comments Based on the Department’s Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Progress Reporting See ELE 5. The district provided a Parent Notification of Limited English Proficiency letter. The letter does not contain all of the required elements. Additionally, the district’s Guided Decision Form does not meet the requirements under this standard. The notification letter is not provided in parents’ native language. Submit the following documentation by December 18, 2006: Interviews indicated that academic support is only available to students who are on IEPs. Provide a description of what regular education academic support is available to LEP students by December 18, 2006. Updated parent letter that contains all required elements. Samples of translated parent notification letters. Documentation submitted by the district indicated that LEP students have equal access to nonacademic programs and extracurricular activities. See ELE 6. By continuing to train teachers during the summer of 2006, the district plans to have a total of twelve teachers trained in Categories 2 and 3 by June of 2007. Currently, ELE teachers do not have the requisite amount of training. Refer to the corrective action and progress reporting ordered under ELE 5. Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 18 of 19 ELE Criterion Number and Topic ELE 15 Professional Development Requirements ELE 16 Equitable Facilities (To be reviewed during next CPR visit) ELE 17 DOE Data Submission Requirements and Program Evaluation ELE 18 Records of LEP Students(To be reviewed during next CPR visit.) Comments Based on the Department’s Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Progress Reporting See ELE 14. The district has a professional development plan based on a Professional Development Needs Assessment. Based on interviews, ESL tutors/teachers do not have sufficient space that is comparable to instructional areas provided to other students. ESL tutors/teachers often work with students in hallways, libraries, or in spaces shared with special education teachers. Provide a list of the locations where ESL tutors/teachers provide services to students and indicate what steps the district has taken to address any insufficient space by December 18, 2006. The district reports the required information to the Department annually. Additionally, the district conducts periodic evaluations of its ELE program. LEP student records did not include all required components, including a log of access; parent notification letters; and MELA-O, MEPA, and MCAS scores. Mid-cycle Report Format 2006.doc Submit the following documentation by December 18, 2006: Documentation tracking form for required elements of ELE student records and the name of the personnel responsible for monitoring the documenting of the required paperwork. Results of an administrative review regarding the documentation of the required elements in the LEP student records for the 06-07 SY. Indicate what steps were taken to address any records identified with incomplete documentation. Rev. 5/22/06 Grafton Public School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report July 24, 2006 Page 19 of 19