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
January 5, 2006
Alan P. G. Safran, Executive Director
Media and Technology Charter High School
1001 Commonwealth Avenue
Boston, MA 02215
Re:
Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report
Dear Mr. Safran:
Enclosed is the Department of Education's Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report. This report
contains findings based on onsite monitoring activities conducted to verify the implementation status and
effectiveness of corrective action activities approved by the Department that were intended to address
findings of noncompliance included in the Media and Technology Charter High School Coordinated
Program Review Report issued on October 28, 2003. (In the remainder of this letter, please read “district”
as meaning “school district or charter school.”)
As you know, one component of the Department’s Mid-cycle Review process is the review of your
district's self-assessment in the area of English learner education (ELE). The purpose of this activity is to
determine if your district is beginning to implement the significant changes in M.G.L. Chapter 71A, this
state’s law governing the education of limited English proficient students that was adopted by voters as
Question 2 in 2002. The Department has reviewed your district’s ELE self-assessment documents and is
providing you now with advisory comments and actions to be implemented in anticipation of your
district’s next scheduled Coordinated Program Review. Where indicated in our report, your district is
urged to request technical assistance in areas that, based solely on your self-assessment documents, were
found not likely to be fully implemented. To secure assistance, you may consult with your Mid-cycle
Review Chairperson or call Robyn Dowling-Grant in Program Quality Assurance Services at 781-3383732. 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 certain noncompliance issues to be resolved, others were
partially corrected, not addressed at all and/or the Department’s onsite team identified new issues of
noncompliance. In areas where the district has failed to implement fully its approved Corrective Action
Plan, the Department views these findings to be serious.
As the Department previously informed you, in cases where a district fails to fully and effectively
implement a Corrective Action Plan, which was proposed by your district and approved by the
Department, the Department must then prepare a Corrective Action Plan for the district, which must be
implemented without further delay. You will find these requirements for corrective action and further
progress reporting included in the attached report together with any steps that must be taken by the district
to fully implement new special education requirements. Please provide the Department with your written
assurance that 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 Department's
Onsite Chairperson by January 20, 2006.
Your staff's cooperation throughout these Follow-up Monitoring activities is appreciated. Should you
require additional clarification of information included in our report, please do not hesitate to contact the
Onsite Team Chairperson at 781-338-3729.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth M. Young, Ed.D.
Coordinated Program Review Follow-up Chairperson
Program Quality Assurance Services
John D. Stager, Administrator
Program Quality Assurance Services
c:
David P. Driscoll, Commissioner of Education
Matt Vettle, Board of Trustees
encl.:
Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report
2
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT
Media and Technology Charter High School
ONSITE VERIFICATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
AND/OR IDENTIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL FINDINGS REQUIRING CORRECTIVE ACTION
Date of Coordinated Program Review (CPR): May 19-20, 2003
Date of Coordinated Program Review Corrective Action Plan Approval: December 12, 2003
Dates of Corrective Action Plan Progress Reports: June 15, 2004, September 27, 2004, December 15, 2004 and May 30, 2005
Dates of this Mid-cycle Review Onsite Visit: November 7, 2005
Date of this Report: January 5, 2006
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
Special Education
Requirements
(including new
IDEA-2004
Requirements
Media and Technology Charter High School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 1 of 21
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
SE 6
Determination of
Transition Services
SE 8
IEP Team
composition and
attendance
SE 12
Frequency of reevaluation
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

Yes
Yes
Partial
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Student
records
and staff
interviews
The onsite team review student
records that demonstrated that
vision statements included
information regarding a
student’s future direction and
goals.
Student
records
and staff
interviews
Student
records
and staff
interviews
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
Student records indicate
that the three-year reevaluations are not being
conducted in a timely
manner. The reevaluations inconsistently
met the 45-day timeline
requirement and in some
instances were done in
excess of two months late.
The charter school must
analyze their current system for
monitoring timeline compliance
and revise any areas that do not
support re-evaluations being
conducted within the 45-day
timeline.
Based on records and
interviews all required
personnel attend Team
meetings.
Student records indicate that
three-year re-evaluations are
occurring.
Partial
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 2 of 21
The charter school must submit
a narrative describing the
analysis process and as a result
of the determination of the
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
cause(s) for the delays submit a
detailed description of the
actions that will be
implemented to correct the noncompliance. This narrative
must be submitted to the
Department by February 28,
2006.
The charter school will also be
require to review the reevaluations for the second half
of the 2005-2006 school year
and submit a summary of
timeline compliance for those
records reviewed to the
Department by June 30, 2006.
SE 13
Progress Reports
and content
Partial
Student
records
and staff
interviews
Progress reports are being
issued as required.
Partial
Student records showed
that progress reports were
inconsistently developed.
Progress reports lacked
data on student progress,
did not reflect any action
that might be taken if a
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 3 of 21
The charter school must
provide training to special
education staff and related
service providers on content of
IEP Progress reports. Submit
evidence of training, to include
agenda, materials and
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
SE 14
Review and
revision of IEPs
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

No
Method(s)
of
Verification
Student
records
and staff
interviews
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Not Fully
Implemented
Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
student was not making
progress and did not
always accurately reflect
the goals on the student
IEP.
attendance, to the Department
by February 28, 2006.
Student records showed
that the charter school
inconsistently held annual
IEP meetings within the
anniversary date of the
implementation of the
IEP, leading to the
expiration of the IEP.
The charter school must
analyze their current system for
monitoring timeline compliance
and revise any areas that do not
support annual meetings being
conducted prior to the
expiration of the current IEP.
Please provide evidence of a
review of IEP progress reports
post training along with sample
end of year progress reports to
the Department by June 30,
2006.
The charter school must submit
a narrative describing the
analysis process and as a result
of the determination of the
cause(s) for the delays submit a
detailed description of the
actions that will be
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 4 of 21
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
implemented to correct the noncompliance. This narrative
must be submitted to the
Department by February 28,
2006.
Please provide a report of the
timeliness of convening annual
review meetings prior to the
expiration of the IEP for the
second half of the 2005-2006
SY due to the Department
June 30, 2006.
SE 25B
Resolution of
disputes
No
Staff
interviews
Not Fully
Implemented
The charter school has not
addressed the issue of
dispute resolution and has
no policies in place to
meet this criteria.
The charter school must review
the new IDEA requirements for
this criterion and create
procedures to be put in place to
handle dispute resolution.
Please submit a narrative of the
review and subsequent policies
and/or procedures to the
Department by February 28,
2006.
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 5 of 21
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
SE 30
Notice of
procedural
safeguards
SE 46
Procedures for
suspension of
students with
disabilities more
than 10 days
Other Special
Education
Requirements
Originally Cited in
CPR Report
SE 2
Required and
optional
assessments
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

Yes
Yes
No
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Student
records
and staff
interviews
Staff members were aware of
the new notice and indicated
that they were distributing them
as appropriate.
Student
records
and staff
interviews
Procedures have been put in
place and staff members were
aware of the manifestation
determination process and
procedures.
Student
records
and staff
interviews
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Not Fully
Implemented
Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
On site student record
review indicated that the
charter school is not
consistently conducting
teacher assessments and
educational status
assessments.
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 6 of 21
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
The charter school must
conduct staff training on
completion of teacher
assessments and create a system
for monitoring the inclusion of
teacher assessments and
educational status assessments
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
in the student record.
Documentation of the training
and a narrative describing the
student record monitoring
process must be submitted by
February 28, 2006. A
summary of the results of a
review of student records for
completion of teacher
assessments and educational
assessments post-training
should be submitted to the
Department by June 30, 2006.
SE 9
Eligibility
Determination
Partial
Student
records
and staff
interviews
Partial
Student records
demonstrated that consent
to evaluate forms were not
consistently filled out
correctly. Some examples
lacked the types of testing
and there was no
indication of specific tests
being done. The resulting
IEP and/or notices were
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 7 of 21
The charter school must train
staff on how to appropriately
complete consent to evaluate
forms to include the type of
testing and indicating specific
tests where appropriate.
Pleas submit to the Department
evidence of the training to
include an agenda, materials
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
18A
IEP Development
and Content
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

Partial
Method(s)
of
Verification
Student
records
and staff
interviews
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Partial
Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
not issued immediately.
and attendance by February
28, 2006. Please submit copies
of 4 randomly selected consent
forms to the Department by
June 30, 2006.
Parents are not provided
the IEP at the conclusion
of the Team meeting, nor
are they provided any
written information
detailing the agreements
reached during the
meeting. The IEP’s are
inconsistent in the area of
goals. The IEPS reflected
what the student should be
doing instead of outlining
clearly defined achievable
goals for the individual
student.
The charter school will train
staff on the immediate standard
and create a system to monitor
IEP development to ensure that
parents either leave with an IEP
or documentation detailing the
agreements reached.
Please provide evidence of the
staff training on the immediate
standard including an agenda,
training materials and
attendance sheet. Please submit
this to the Department by
February 28, 2006.
Also please submit a narrative
describing in detail your
internal monitoring process to
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 8 of 21
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
ensure the timely issue of IEPs
consistent with regulation and
the results of your internal
review of providing the IEP
immediately to parents posttraining. Please submit this to
the Department by June 30,
2006.
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 9 of 21
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
SE 24
Notice
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

No
Method(s)
of
Verification
Student
records
and staff
interviews
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
Not Fully
Implemented
Student records
demonstrated that N1
notices were not always
provided to the parent
with the proposed IEP and
/or placement.
The charter school must
provide training to the special
education staff on providing the
appropriate notice to parents.
Evidence of this training
including the agenda, training
materials and attendance must
be submitted to the Department
by February 28, 2006.
Please provide a sample of 5
N1 notices completed posttraining to the Department by
June 30, 2006.
SE 29
Communication in
Home Language
No
Student
records
and staff
interviews
Not Fully
Implemented
Student records and
interviews indicate that
the charter school has
translated mandated
materials and forms
available for use,
however, when a parent
was identified as a nonEnglish speaker, the forms
and notices were not
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 10 of 21
Please provide a detailed
narrative on what steps the
charter school has taken to
secure translation services both
oral and written when the
parent is a speaker of a
language other than English.
Also please describe how staff
members are made aware that
that a parent may need
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
translated into the
appropriate language.
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
translation services.
Please submit this narrative to
the Department by February
28, 2006.
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 11 of 21
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
SE 32
Parent Advisory
Committee
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

No
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Staff
Interviews
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
Not Fully
Implemented
The charter school
indicated that they have a
parent board and that
possibly two parents in
that group are parents of
student’s with special
needs.
The charter school needs to
establish bylaws for its Parent
Advisory Council that includes
seeking participation of parents
with children that have special
needs.
Please submit a detailed
narrative of the reconstruction
of the Advisory Council in
order to be compliant with this
criterion. Please submit
evidence of outreach to parents
of special education students
and provide a copy of the
councils by laws.
There are no bylaws for
the Parent Advisory
Council and there is no
special subgroup or
committee for Special
Education. The Council
does not participate in
planning or evaluation of
special education
programming.
Please submit this to the
Department by June 30, 2006.
.
SE 36
IEP
Implementation
Partial
Student
records
and staff
interviews
The one special education
teacher and the related service
providers are appropriately
credentialed.
Partial
Interviews indicate that
there have been service
delays due to limited
availability of staff and
related service providers.
The current organizational
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 12 of 21
The charter school must
evaluate the services and
programming it currently offers
specifically in the area of
Special Education. The district
must examine the consented to
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
structure does not
employee enough staff to
provide services, complete
required paperwork and
monitor provision of
services.
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
IEPs of all currently enrolled
students and identify any
existing gaps in programs and
services.
Please provide a detailed
narrative of this review and
identify what steps have been
taken in order to ensure
regulatory compliance.
Please submit this to the
Department by June 30, 2006.
SE 51
SPED
Certification
Partial
Document
review and
staff
interviews
The special education teacher
and administrator are both
appropriately certified.
Partial
Documentation and
interviews indicate that
the Special Education
teacher is now employed
full time, but has a full
caseload of direct services
to provide which leaves
little or no time for other
assigned duties. The
Special Education
Administrator works
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 13 of 21
See Corrective Action Plan
order for SE 36.
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
approximately a maximum
of one day per week and
provides no direct
supervision or support to
the Special Education
teacher.
SE 53
Use of
Paraprofessionals
Partial
Student
records
and staff
interviews
The charter school doe not
currently employ or use any
para-professional staff.
Partial
The charter school is
using it’s on site tutoring
program, MATCH Corps,
in lieu of paraprofessional
support for students with
special education needs.
These tutors do not
receive training to assist in
Special Education service
provision nor are they
supervised by an
appropriately certified
special education
professional. These tutors
appear on the student’s
service delivery grid,
however they are not part
of the special education
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 14 of 21
The charter school needs to
discontinue the practice of
including the MATCH Corps
tutoring on the student IEPs as
this is a regular education
support provided to all students
enrolled in MATCH High
School. If the Team determines
that a student needs addition
special education support in the
form of a para professional staff
member, then this must appear
on the service delivery grid.
Paraprofessional staff indicated
on the service delivery grid
must be appropriately trained to
assist in providing special
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
program.
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
education and related services
to students with disabilities
consistent with each student’s
IEP. Further they must be
supervised by an appropriately
certified or licensed
professional.
Please provide evidence of a
review of IEP service delivery
grids along with sample service
delivery portions of four
student IEPs to the Department
by June 30, 2006.
SE 56
Special Education
Programs
Evaluated
Partial
Staff
interviews
The charter school uses MCAS
scores and other standardized,
academic achievement tests to
measure the success of the
school in meeting individual
student needs.
Partial
The charter school does
not formally evaluate the
special education
program. There is no
methodology for
evaluating the program’s
effectiveness in meeting
IEP goals as specified on a
student’s IEP. There is no
review conducted to
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 15 of 21
The charter school must
conduct a special education
program self-evaluation for the
2005-2006 school year. The
process must be documented
and results submitted to the
Department by June 30,
2006.
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
ensure that there is
regulatory compliance or
that regulatory standards
are being met.
Civil Rights
(MOA) and Other
General Education
Requirements
MOA 4
Disproportionality
MOA 16
Notice to Students
Yes
Staff
interviews
The charter school continues to
have more male than female
students receiving special
education services. They have
examined the issue and found
no underlying cause within the
school itself. Students are
primarily identified as needing
special education prior to their
enrollment in the charter
school.
Yes
Document
review and
staff
interviews
The charter school now has a
written notice that meets the
requirements of this criterion.
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 16 of 21
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2005-2006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
to be
Substantially
Implemented
and Effective
Or
New IDEA
Requirement
s
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Findings Regarding
Corrective Action Plan
Activities
Or
Basis of Findings Regarding
Implementation of New
IDEA Requirements
Corrective
Action Plan
Determined
Not Fully
Implemented
Or
Additional
Issues Have
Been
Identified

Basis of Findings
Regarding Incomplete
or Ineffective
Implementation of
Approved Corrective
Action Plan
Or
Basis of Findings of
Additional
Noncompliance
Other Regulated
Programs
Addressed During
this Mid-cycle
Review
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 17 of 21
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Further Progress
Reporting Requirements
Media and Technology Charter High School
English Learning Education (ELE) Requirements
Mid-Cycle Review Advisory Comments Resulting From The Department’s Review Of Local Self-Assessment Documents
(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
Advisory Comments Resulting from the Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
Document Submission
The charter school indicated that they do not have any LEP
students at this time. They stated they administer the MCAS
exam to all students in grade 10.
Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Further
Progress Reporting Requirements to be Implemented in Anticipation of the
District’s Next Scheduled Coordinated Program Review
ELE 2
MCAS
Participation
The charter school indicated that they do not have any LEP
students at this time. They stated they administer the MCAS
exam to all students in grade 10.
ELE 3
Initial
Identification
All students are required to complete a home language survey.
The survey met all required elements and is available in
several languages If a home language survey indicates that a
student does not speak English at home the student is tested for
English proficiency using the LAS-R/W.
The charter school has appropriate waiver forms and
procedures in place, however indicated there are no LEP
students enrolled.
The charter school has a plan in place for initial identification, however after
reviewing the materials it is unclear which person responsible for reviewing home
language surveys is and who administers the LAS-R/W to students. The charter
school must review policy development in these areas and submit updated
policies and procedures to the Department by June 30, 2006.
The charter school indicated that they do not have any LEP
students at this time.
The charter school must develop a description of the ELE program they would
put in place upon enrolling students who are determined to be limited English
proficient. Please submit the narrative description of the ELE program to the
Department by June 30, 2006.
ELE 4
Waiver
Procedures
ELE 5
Program
Placement and
Structure
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 18 of 21
ELE Criterion
Number
and
Topic
ELE 6
Program Exit
and Readiness
ELE 7
Parent
Involvement
Advisory Comments Resulting from the Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
Document Submission
The charter school indicated that they do not have any LEP
students at this time.
Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Further
Progress Reporting Requirements to be Implemented in Anticipation of the
District’s Next Scheduled Coordinated Program Review
The school must develop procedures to indicate when a student who is LEP is
ready to exit the English Language Learner program. Please provide the
Department with a narrative describing the ELE exiting procedures by June
30, 2006.
The procedures and polices indicated meet the standard in this
criterion.
ELE 8
Declining Entry
to a Program
The charter school indicated that they do not have any LEP
students at this time.
ELE 9
Instructional
Grouping
The charter school indicated that they do not have any LEP
students at this time. The charter school also indicated that
they did not group students of different ages together.
ELE 10
Parental
Notification
The charter school indicated that they do not have any LEP
students at this time.
ELE 11
Equal Access to
Academic
Programs and
Services
The charter school indicated that they do not have any LEP
students at this time. The charter school indicated that all
programming options are open to all students.
ELE 12
Equal Access to
Nonacademic
and Extracurricular
Programs
The charter school indicated that they do not have any LEP
students at this time. The charter school indicated that all
clubs and extra-curricular programs are open to all students.
The charter school must develop procedures for declining program entry and
provide a copy of these to the Department by June 30, 2006.
The charter school must develop procedures for parental notification. Please
provide a copy of these parental notification procedures to the Department by
June 30, 2006.
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 19 of 21
ELE Criterion
Number
and
Topic
ELE 13
Advisory Comments Resulting from the Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
Document Submission
The charter school indicated that they do not have any LEP
students at this time.
Follow-up
Support
ELE 14
Licensure and
Fluency
Requirements
Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Further
Progress Reporting Requirements to be Implemented in Anticipation of the
District’s Next Scheduled Coordinated Program Review
The charter school must develop procedures for follow-up support and monitoring
once a student exits the ELE program. The procedures should include types of
support available and who is responsible for monitoring student progress. Please
submit a copy of these procedures to the Department by June 30, 2006.
The charter school indicated that all teachers on staff have a
minimum of a bachelor degree from accredited colleges where
the language of instruction was English.
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 20 of 21
ELE Criterion
Number
and
Topic
ELE 15
Professional
Development
Requirements
Advisory Comments Resulting from the Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
Document Submission
The charter school indicated that they do not have any LEP
students at this time and currently do not employ any ELE
related staff.
ELE 16
Equitable
Facilities (To be reviewed
during next
CPR visit)
The charter school indicated that they do not have any LEP
students at this time.
ELE 17
DOE Data
Submission
Requirements
and Program
Evaluation
The charter school indicated that they do not have any LEP
students at this time.
ELE 18 Records
of LEP
Students(To be reviewed
during next
CPR visit.)
The charter school indicated that they do not have any LEP
students at this time.
Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Further
Progress Reporting Requirements to be Implemented in Anticipation of the
District’s Next Scheduled Coordinated Program Review
Media and Technology Charter high School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 5, 2006
Page 21 of 21