Massachusetts Department of
Elementary and Secondary Education
350 Main Street, Malden, Massachusetts 02148-5023
Telephone: (781) 338-3700
TTY: N.E.T. Relay 1-800-439-2370
September 17, 2008
Nancy Gustafson, Superintendent
Millis Public Schools
245 Plain Street
Millis, MA 02054
Re: Mid-cycle Report
Dear Superintendent Gustafson:
Enclosed is the Department of 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 June 23, 2004. The Mid-cycle Report also contains
findings based on onsite monitoring of special education compliance criteria that have been
created or substantially changed in response to IDEA 2004.
Another component of the Department’s Mid-cycle Review is the review of your school district
or charter school's self-assessment—documentation and any written analysis of compliance--in
the area of English learner education (ELE). 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 and, based
solely on that self-assessment, is providing you in this report with findings 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 findings or this prescribed corrective action from
me or from staff in the Department’s Office of Language Acquisition and Achievement at 781338-3503. ELE guidance documents are available on the Department’s website at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/ell/.
While the Department of Education found your district to have resolved certain noncompliance
issues, others were partially corrected or not addressed at all, or the Department’s onsite team
identified new issues of noncompliance, either noncompliance with special education criteria
added or substantially changed in response to IDEA 2004, noncompliance with ELE criteria, or
other new noncompliance. 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 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.
1
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. You must
submit your statement of assurance to me by October 6, 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 781-338-3755.
Sincerely,
Michelle Griffin, Mid-cycle Review Chairperson
Program Quality Assurance Services
Darlene A. Lynch, Director
Program Quality Assurance Services
c:
Mitchell D. Chester, Ed.D., Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education
Chris Gove, Chairperson, School Committee
Susan Donelan, District Program Review Follow-up Coordinator
Encl.: Mid-cycle Report
2
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE REPORT
MILLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Date of Coordinated Program Review (CPR) Final Report: June 23, 2004
Date Coordinated Program Review Corrective Action Approved or Ordered: October 8, 2004
Dates of Corrective Action Plan Progress Reports: January 26, 2005; June 6, 2005; October 4, 2005
Dates of this Mid-cycle Review Onsite Visit: May 20 and 21, 2008
Date of this Report: September 17, 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
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

SE 7
Age of
Majority
Partially
Implemented
Interviews
Document
Review
Record
Review
A review of documentation and
interviews indicate that the
district has forms and procedures
for implementing the
requirements of this criterion.
Staff are familiar with the
requirement that student consent
must be obtained, or, in the
alternative, evidence of
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

Partially
Implemented
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
Interviews and
documentation indicate
that there is confusion
about the appropriate way
to secure a student’s
decision to share or
delegate decision-making.
Interviews indicate that an
18-year old student must
Revise the age of majority
forms and procedures
consistent with the
requirements of this criterion.
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 1 of 33
Provide training to all staff
responsible for Team
discussions concerning age of
majority requirements, and for
Criterion
Number/
Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

guardianship or the student’s
decision to share or delegate
decision-making at age 18.
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
wait for the next Team
meeting to make a
decision in this regard.
However, in the absence
of any court actions to the
contrary (e.g,
guardianship), the student
must make the decision to
retain educational
decision-making rights
(and therefore consent to
any services), delegate or
share decision-making
upon reaching the age of
majority. There are
different processes for
making the decision to
share or delegate
decision-making, which
are not distinguished in
the district’s forms and
practices. In addition, the
district at times permits
the form letters to be
completed at home (and,
therefore, out of the
presence of the Team or a
representative of the
school district and other
securing student consent or
decision-making with regard to
educational decisions upon
reaching the age of majority.
Ensure that the training
includes the requirements of
this criterion.
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 2 of 33
Provide the revised form(s) and
procedures, and a copy of
agenda, training materials and
attendance sheets by
November 14, 2008.
Develop an internal oversight
and tracking system to ensure
that age of majority procedures
are appropriately implemented,
including district obligations at
the student’s 18th birthday.
Submit a description of the
internal oversight and tracking
system, including person(s)
responsible for the oversight.
Submit this information to the
Department by November 14,
2008.
Criterion
Number/
Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

SE 9
(currently
SE 9A) (See
also MOA
18)
Elements of
the
eligibility
determina-
√
Interviews
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
witness).
Complete an internal review of
records to ensure that age of
majority procedures were
appropriately followed for all
students who reached the age
of 18 since the training.
Provide a report of this review
by March 16, 2009, including
the following information:
 Number of records
reviewed;
 Number of records
found in compliance
with the requirements
of this criterion;
 Name and role of staff
completing the review;
 Actions taken to
remedy any areas of
non-compliance.
Interviews indicate that general
education teachers provide
services and accommodations,
and that there are active child
study teams or processes at each
level. See also CR 18.
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 3 of 33
Criterion
Number/
Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
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
Record review and interviews
indicate that the Team develops
an IEP at the Team meeting
using the most current IEP
format provided by the
Department. Specially designed
instruction was seen in IEPs.
Partially
Implemented
Record review indicates
that page IEP 3/PLEP B is
at times left blank, even
for students with
documented history of
behavioral issues.
Interviews indicate that
the district does work
with students and families
to provide some services
and accommodations for
students with behavioral
needs, but this is not
documented in IEPs.
Provide training to all special
education staff on the
following:
 That the IEP must be
completed addressing all
elements of the most current
IEP format, including page
IEP 3/PLEP B.
Provide evidence of the
training, including agenda,
training materials and signed
attendance sheets, indicating
role, by November 14, 2008.

tion;
general
education
accommoda
-tions and
services for
ineligible
students
SE 18A
IEP
development
and content
Partially
Implemented
Record
Review
Document
Review
Interviews
Though there was a finding in the
CPR report concerning the Team
making decisions solely based on
the availability of district
resources, this information is no
longer part of this criterion.
Interviews, however, indicate
that in some cases this still
happens. The district should
address this, as it implicates other
areas of special education law
not reviewed as part of this
report.
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 4 of 33
Develop an internal oversight
and tracking system to ensure
that IEPs are completed
appropriately, specifically, to
ensure that page IEP3/PLEP B
is not left blank. Submit a
description of the internal
Criterion
Number/
Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

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
oversight and tracking system,
including person(s) responsible
for the oversight. Submit this
information to the Department
by November 14, 2008.
SE 20
Least
Restrictive
Environment
Partially
Implemented
Document
Review
Interviews
Record
Individual staff commitment to
educating students in the least
restrictive environment was
evident in staff interviews.
Documentation further indicates
that administration and staff
Partially
Implemented
Interviews indicate that at
times, because of a lack of
alternative placements
within the district, the
program selected is not
always the least restrictive
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 5 of 33
Complete an internal review of
IEPs developed since the
training. Provide a report of
this review by March 16,
2009, including the following
information:
 Number of records
reviewed;
 Number of records found in
compliance with the
requirements of this
criterion;
 Name and role of staff
completing the review;
 Actions taken by the district
to remedy any areas of noncompliance.
See SE 43 for corrective action.
Criterion
Number/
Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

review
SE 24
√
Notice to
parent
SE 32
Parent
Advisory
Council
Partially
Implemented
Record
review
Document
Review
Interviews
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

consult with one another and
review the requirements of the
least restrictive environment.
Record review indicates that
written notices are sent at all
appropriate junctures, and that
they answer all questions as
required by federal regulations.
Documentation and interviews
indicate that the school district
has established a district-wide
parent advisory council (PAC) on
special education. The school
district conducts, in cooperation
with the parent advisory council,
at least one workshop annually
within the district on the rights of
students and their parents and
guardians under the state and
federal special education laws.
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
environment for students.
Specifically, interviews
indicate that students at
the high school level are
at times placed out of
district because of a lack
of programming for
students with
emotional/behavioral
needs. See also and SE
43.
Partially
Implemented
Documentation and
interviews indicate that
the parent advisory
council does not
participate in the
planning, development
and evaluation of the
school district’s special
education programs. The
district was, at the time of
the review, considering
means of obtaining
participation of parents in
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 6 of 33
Provide a description of how
the PAC will participate in the
planning, development and
evaluation of the district’s
special education programs by
November 14, 2008.
Criterion
Number/
Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

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 evaluation of the
special education
programs, including the
possible use of a parent
survey.
Interviews
SE 34
√
Continuum
of Services
Record
review
Document
Review
SE 50
Administrator
of Special
Education
Some
components
of SE 50 in
the CPR
√
Interviews
Document
Review
Documentation and interviews
indicate that each school has
documented “Pyramids of
Support and Intervention,”
which indicates that general
education modifications and
accommodations are seen as part
of the continuum of services. In
addition, the district has hired an
ABA therapist and a behavior
specialist for the next school
year to increase the
programming for students with
emotional and behavioral needs.
Interviews and documentation
indicate that the school district
has an appointed person who acts
as the Administrator of Special
Education, specifically, the
Director of Pupil Personnel
Services (herein, the director).
The director is appropriately
licensed to supervise all special
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 7 of 33
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/
Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

report are
now included
in criterion
CR 18.
SE 54
Professional
development
Partially
Implemented
Document
Review
Interviews
education for the school district
and ensure compliance with all
federal and state special
education laws.
The district considers the needs
of all staff in developing training
opportunities for professional
and paraprofessional staff and
provides a variety of professional
development offerings, including
through professional learning
communities established by the
district. The district also has
held mandatory workshops for
paraprofessionals on specific
therapies, collaboration and
emotional development.
Documentation of offerings to
professional staff includes topics
such as differentiated instruction
and state and federal special
education requirements.
Interviews clarified that all
paraprofessional and professional
staff are required to attend these
trainings, and that they cover the
required training topics.
Interviews indicate that the
transportation coordinator meets
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
Partially
Implemented
The district submitted no
evidence of in-service
training for transportation
providers or samples of
information provided on
students’ needs and
problems and appropriate
emergency measures, as is
required by this criterion.
Provide evidence that the
district provides in-service
training for all locally hired
and contracted transportation
providers, as required by this
criterion. Transportation
providers include drivers of
regular and special education
vehicles and any attendants or
aides identified by a Team for
either type of vehicle.
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 8 of 33
Provide evidence of this
training, including agenda,
training materials, sign-in
attendance sheets (including
roles of attendees), and
examples of student-specific
information provided to
transportation providers.
Provide all of the above by
November 14, 2008.
Criterion
Number/
Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

SE 56
Special
education
programs
and services
are
evaluated
√
Document
Review
Interviews
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
with transportation drivers at
that start of the school year to
review medical and IEP issues.
Documentation indicates that the
district’s special education
programs and services are
regularly evaluated.
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
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
SE 3
√
Record review
The district appropriately
makes specific learning
disability determinations.
Observations are appropriately
conducted, and the agreement
of the Team is documented.
Specific
Learning
Disabilities
Interviews
Document
Review
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
The district is aware of the new
forms for determining specific
learning disabilities, which will
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 9 of 33
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
SE 6 ##1 – 3
Partially
Implemented
Interviews
Determination
of Transition
Services
Document
Review
Record review
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
be required next year.
Record review indicates that
IEPs contain vision statements
and students participate in
Team meetings when they
reach the appropriate age.
Some records reviewed and
documentation contained
appropriate transition planning
forms and transition planning.
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
Partially
Implemented
Some of the records
reviewed lacked evidence
of appropriate transition
planning, specifically,
transition planning forms
and transition goals.
Develop an internal oversight
and tracking system to ensure
that Teams appropriately
address transition planning in
IEPs, specifically through the
use of transition goals and the
transition planning form.
Submit a description of the
internal oversight and tracking
system, including person(s)
responsible for the oversight.
Submit this information to the
Department by November 14,
2008.
Interviews indicate that
appropriate special education
staff are familiar with the
requirements of this criterion.
Complete a review of student
records age 15 and over and
submit to the Department the
following:
 Name and role of staff
responsible for review;
 Number of records
reviewed;
 Number of appropriately
completed transition
planning forms;
 Number of IEPs with
transition goals or with
documentation that the
Team believed that
transition goals were not
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 10 of 33
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
needed;
 Actions taken to schedule
Team meetings immediately
to address transition
planning.
Provide the report by March
16, 2009.
SE 8
IEP Team
composition
and
attendance
SE 12
Frequency of
re-evaluation
√
Interviews
Documentation
Record review
Interviews
√
Record review
SE 13
√
Progress
Reports and
content
Record review
Interviews
Student record review indicates
appropriate Team attendance.
At times, Team attendance is
exemplary with up to seven
general education teachers
present. Interviews and record
review indicate that Team
meetings always have a chair
present that has the authority to
commit the resources of the
district, and is knowledgeable
about the resources of the
district. The district follows
appropriate procedures for
excusing Team members from
meetings.
Re-evaluations are conducted
in a timely manner and when
required, including before
finding a student no longer
eligible for special education.
Record review indicates that
progress reports are completed
at appropriate times, consistent
with the district’s report card
cycle. Appropriate staff are
Partially
Implemented
Progress reports do not
always reflect actual
progress on goals, and are
written in terms of general
progress in class without
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 11 of 33
Provide training to all staff
responsible for completing
progress reports on the content
of progress reports, and on
appropriate steps to take when
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

familiar with and have
appropriate forms for
completing summaries of
academic achievement and
functional performance,
including recommendations on
how to assist the student in
meeting his or her
postsecondary goals.
Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
addressing specific goals
in the IEP. In addition,
record review indicates
that when a progress
report indicates a lack of
student success, the
district does not always
reconvene the Team to
discuss the lack of
expected progress.
a progress report indicates a
lack of expected progress.
Provide evidence of the
training, including agenda,
training materials and signed
attendance sheets, indicating
role, by November 14, 2008.
Develop an internal oversight
and tracking system to ensure
that progress reports are
appropriately completed, and
that appropriate steps are taken
when a progress report reflects
a lack of student success.
Submit a description of the
internal oversight and tracking
system, including person(s)
responsible for the oversight.
Submit this information to the
Department by November 14,
2008.
Complete an internal review of
progress reports at all levels
created since the training.
Provide a report of this review
by March 16, 2009, including
the following information:
 Number of records reviewed
at each level;
 Number of records found in
compliance with the
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 12 of 33
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
requirements of this
criterion;
 Name and role of staff
completing the review;
 Actions taken by the district
to remedy any areas of noncompliance.
SE 14
Review and
revision of
IEPs
Record review
√
Interviews
Document
Review
SE 25B
√
Interviews
√
Interviews
Resolution of
disputes
SE 33
Involvement
in the General
Curriculum
Document
Review
Team meetings are held at least
annually to review and revise
the IEP. In addition, IEPs are
revised appropriately through
amendments, consistent with
recent changes to IDEA 2004.
Appropriate staff are aware
that within 15 days of
receiving notice that a parent
has made an official hearing
request to Special Education
Appeals, the district is required
to convene a meeting with the
parent(s) and the relevant
member(s) of the IEP Team,
including a representative of
the district with decisionmaking authority, to try to
resolve the dispute.
Interviews and documentation
indicate that district personnel
understand the rights of
students with disabilities to be
full participants in the general
curriculum. The district
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 13 of 33
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
SE 39A
Procedures
for services to
eligible
private school
students
whose parents
reside in the
district
Criterion
Implemented

Partially
Implemented
Method(s) of
Verification
Document
Review
Interviews
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
ensures that Teams document
the student’s participation in
the general curriculum in the
IEP.
Interviews indicate that the
director is familiar with the
procedures used to provide
services to eligible students
enrolled in private schools at
private expense whose parents
reside in the district.
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
Partially
Implemented
Interviews and
documentation indicate
that the district does not
conduct child find
activities--comparable to
those for public school
students--for all students
enrolled at private
expense in private schools
in the district.
See SE 15 below regarding
Outreach.
(SE 39A does
not apply to
charter schools
or vocational
schools)
See SE 15 below
regarding Outreach.
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 14 of 33
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
SE 39B
Procedures
for services to
eligible
students in
private
schools in the
district whose
parents reside
out of state
Partially
Implemented
Interviews
Interviews indicate that the
director is familiar with the
procedures used to provide
services to eligible students
enrolled in private schools at
private expense whose parents
reside out of state.
(SE 39B does
not apply to
charter schools
or vocational
schools)
SE 46
Procedures
for
suspension of
students with
disabilities
more than 10
days
Document
Review
Record review
Partially
Implemented
Document
Review
Interviews
Interviews indicate that staff
are familiar with appropriate
procedures for the suspension
of students with disabilities.
Manifestation determination
meetings are held.
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Partially
Implemented
Partially
Implemented
Handbooks submitted within
this criterion will be reviewed
under criterion CR 10A.
Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Child find efforts are
limited. See SE 15 below.
See SE 15.
Once the district’s child
find efforts are
appropriately
implemented, the district
will be able to
appropriately ensure that
it is providing services to
eligible students who
attend private schools in
the district and whose
parents reside out of state
(if any such students are
identified).
Record review indicates
that manifestation
determination meetings
are not always conducted
in a timely manner. Forms
used for conducting these
meetings must be updated
to be consistent with
IDEA 2004. Record
review indicates that
Teams do not always
consider, in a timely
manner, functional
behavioral assessments
and behavioral
intervention services and
modifications to address
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 15 of 33
Provide training to all special
education staff, principals and
assistant principals concerning
the IDEA 2004 requirements
related to discipline. Provide
evidence of the training,
including agenda, training
materials, and signed
attendance sheets, indicating
staff role. Provide all of the
above by November 14, 2008.
Develop an internal oversight
and tracking system to ensure
that all administrators
appropriately implement IDEA
2004 procedures when special
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
the behavior so that it
does not recur.
education students are subject
to discipline. Submit a
description of the internal
oversight and tracking system,
including person(s) responsible
for the oversight. Submit this
information to the Department
by November 14, 2008.
Documentation indicates
that handbooks lack
appropriate procedures for
discipline of students with
disabilities. Please see CR
10A.
Submit a report of an internal
review of student records posttraining to determine
compliance with ensuring that
manifestation determination
meetings are held when
required, functional behavioral
assessments are conducted and
that notice is sent to parents.
Submit the following
information:
 Name and role of staff
completing review;
 Number of records
reviewed,
 Number of records found in
compliance;
 Corrective action taken as
required.
Submit this report by March
16, 2009.
SE 52
Appropriate
certifications/
√
Document
Review
Interviews and documentation
indicate that the district
accesses interpretation services
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 16 of 33
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
licenses or
other
credentials –
related
service
providers
(to be
reviewed only
with respect to
providers of
interpreting
services)
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Interviews
through Department of Health
and Human Services as
needed. Interviews indicate
that all other related services
staff are appropriately certified.
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Special Education Criteria 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) of Basis of Determination that
Criterion
Basis of Determination
Required Corrective Action,
Number
Implemented Verification
Criterion was Implemented
Partially
that Criterion was
Timelines for

and
Implemented Partially Implemented
Implementation, and
Topic
or Not
or Not Implemented
Progress Reporting
Implemented

Interviews indicate that limited
Interviews indicate that
Revise the district’s child find
Interviews
Partially
child find is conducted in the
Partially
the district does not have
practices so that the district has
SE 15
Implemented
district. Staff in the
Implemented sufficient outreach and
annual or more frequent
Outreach by
superintendent’s
office
contacts
continuous
liaison
with
outreach with those groups
the School
private schools to determine if
other groups or agencies
from which promotion or
District (Child
students from the town are
from which the promotion transfer of students in need of
Find)
enrolled there.
or transfer of students
special education may be
with special needs may be expected, or which would
expected.
include students in need of
special education, consistent
with the requirements of this
criterion. Provide evidence of
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 17 of 33
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
SE 18B
Determination
of placement;
provision of
IEP to parent
Criterion
Implemented

Partially
Implemented
Method(s) of
Verification
Interviews
Record
review
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Record review indicates that at
the Team meeting, after the IEP
has been fully developed, the
Team determines the placement
to deliver the services on the
student’s IEP. The decision
regarding placement is based on
the IEP.
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Partially
Implemented
Interviews indicate that
immediately following the
development of the IEP, the
district provides the parent with
the proposed IEP and proposed
placement along with the
required notice.
Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Interviews indicate that at
times at the elementary
level, some students who
are non-compliant in the
general education
classroom are removed
from their full inclusion
placements for extended
periods of time in a
regular and consistent
manner to special
education staff work
spaces, inconsistent with
service delivery grids and
agreed upon placements.
At times, these students
are placed in these spaces
during instructional
periods, where the special
educators are providing
services to other special
education students.
Interviews indicate that
this is used as an alternate
means of discipline,
without convening the
Team and amending the
IEP.
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 18 of 33
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
the above by November 14,
2008.
See SE 20.
Provide training to all general
and special education staff on
the requirements of
implementation of the IEP as
written, including appropriate
procedures to employ when
students are non-compliant or
have behaviors that interfere
with their learning or that of
other students. (See also SE
43). Provide evidence of the
above trainings, including
agenda, training materials and
signed attendance sheets,
indicating role of staff in
attendance, by November 14,
2008.
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
SE 43
Behavioral
interventions
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
Partially
Implemented
Interviews
Record
review
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Interviews indicate that the
district intends to hire a board
certified behavior analyst and an
ABA therapist for the 20082009 school year.
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Partially
Implemented
Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
See 18A concerning the
completion of page
IEP3/PLEP B.
Provide training for all Team
chairpersons on requirements
that Teams consider including
positive behavioral
interventions and the possible
need for a functional
behavioral assessment for
students whose behaviors
impede their learning or that of
other students. Include in this
training discussion by the
Team of the student’s ability to
follow the school’s discipline
code, and completion of IEP
3/PLEP B. Provide evidence of
the training, including agenda,
training materials and
attendance sheets by
November 14, 2008.
Interviews and record
review indicate that for
students whose behavior
impedes their learning or
the learning of other
students, the Team does
not always consider the
student’s behavior
including positive
behavioral interventions
and the possible need for
a functional behavioral
assessment. See also SE
46.
Develop an internal oversight
and tracking system to ensure
that Teams appropriately
consider positive behavioral
interventions, including FBAs,
supports, services and
accommodations, for students
whose behaviors interfere with
learning. Submit a description
of the internal oversight and
tracking system, including
person(s) responsible for the
oversight. Submit this
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 19 of 33
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
information to the Department
by November 14, 2008.
Submit a report of an internal
review of student records at the
middle and high school levels
for compliance with this
criterion post-training,
including developing
behavioral interventions and
conducting functional
behavioral assessments.
Include in the report the
following:
Name and role of staff
completing review;
 Number of records
reviewed,
 Number in compliance with
this criterion, and
 Corrective action for any
noncompliance found.
Submit this report by March
16, 2009.
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 20 of 33
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

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
Civil Rights
(formerly
MOA) Cited in
CPR Report
and Monitored
in Mid-cycle
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 21 of 33
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s)
of
Verification
CR 10A
Partially
Implemented
Document
Review
Student
handbooks and
codes of
conduct
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
Documentation indicates that
the district has codes of conduct
for students, and has some
school committee policies
concerning teacher conduct.
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

Partially
Implemented
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
Requirements
None of the district’s
student handbooks
contain the following:
 IDEA 2004
procedures for
students not yet
eligible for special
education.
 Appropriate
procedures for
discipline of students
with Section 504
plans.
 Reference to M.G.L.
ch. 76, s. 5.
 The district’s
procedures for
accepting,
investigating, and
resolving complaints
alleging
discrimination or
harassment. (The
elementary and middle
school handbooks
contain contact
information for
allegations of race or
gender harassment,
but not other forms of
Revise the student handbooks
consistent with the column at
left. The Department’s Civil
Rights instrument, which lists
these requirements, can be
found at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/r
eview/cpr/instrument/civilright
s.doc.
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 22 of 33
Provide draft revisions by
March 16, 2009, and a plan to
include this in the next
handbook revision.
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
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
harassment or
discrimination.)
 The disciplinary
measures that the
school may impose if
it determines that
harassment or
discrimination has
occurred.
In addition, while the
handbooks contain
procedures for discipline
of students with
disabilities, these must
be updated to conform
with IDEA 2004. Some
of the handbooks
reference outdated state
regulations.
The high school
handbook is also missing:
A non-discrimination
policy that is consistent
with M.G.L. ch. 76, s. 5
and affirms the district’s
non-tolerance for
harassment and
discrimination based on
race, color, national
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 23 of 33
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
Criterion
Number/Topic
CR 12A
Annual and
continuous
notification
concerning
nondiscrimination and
coordinators
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Partially
Implemented
Method(s)
of
Verification
Document
Review
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
The district submitted job
announcements and student
handbooks. Job announcements
contain appropriate notices of
non-discrimination. While
some of the handbooks
submitted contain some required
elements of this criterion, this is
not consistent.
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

Partially
Implemented
The district also submitted a
page from its website, which
also contains an appropriate
non-discrimination statement.
The district’s homepage also
Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective
Or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
origin, sex, religion, or
sexual orientation.
The middle school
handbook is also missing:
 A non-discrimination
policy that is
consistent with
M.G.L. ch. 76, s. 5
and affirms the
district’s nontolerance for
harassment based on
race, color, national
origin, sex, religion, or
sexual orientation.
Documentation does not
indicate that the district
takes continuing steps to
notify students, parents,
and employees (including
those with impaired
vision or hearing), as well
as unions or professional
organizations holding
collective bargaining or
professional agreements
with the district, that it
does not discriminate on
the basis of race, color,
national origin, sex, or
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 24 of 33
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
Provide a description of the
steps the district will take to
notify students, parents, and
employees (including those
with impaired vision or
hearing), as well as unions or
professional organizations
holding collective bargaining
or professional agreements
with the district, that it does
not discriminate on the basis of
race, color, national origin, sex,
or disability. Describe how the
district will ensure that notices
and notification include the
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

contains this statement.
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
Requirements
disability. Handbooks do
not consistently contain
this information. (See CR
10A.)
name(s), office address(es),
and phone number(s) of the
person(s) designated under CR
11A to coordinate compliance
under Title IX and Section 504.
In addition, the district’s
notification and notices do
not include the name(s),
office address(es), and
phone number(s) of the
person(s) designated
under CR 11A to
coordinate compliance
under Title IX and
Section 504.
CR 18
Responsibilities
of the school
principal
Partially
Implemented
Interviews
Document
Review
Record
review
The district submitted the
District Curriculum
Accommodation Plan, the
“Pyramids of Support and
Interventions” for all three
schools, and the home hospital
procedures.
Partially
Implemented
Interviews indicate that staff are
trained on and familiar with the
DCAP and the pyramids of
intervention.
The district’s instructional
supports currently do not
include appropriate
services for linguistic
minority students that are
consistent with ELL
requirements, or the
provision of services to
address the needs of
children whose behavior
may interfere with
learning. See SE 43 and
ELE criteria.
The principal with the
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 25 of 33
Provide this description by
November 14, 2008.
See SE 43 and ELE criteria.
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
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
Requirements
Partially
implemented
The district does not
currently evaluate all
aspects of its K-12
program annually to
ensure that all students,
regardless of race, color,
sex, religion, national
origin, limited English
proficiency, sexual
orientation, disability, or
housing status, have equal
access to all programs,
including athletics and
other extracurricular
activities and makes such
changes as are indicated
Provide a copy of the district’s
self-evaluation by March 16,
2009.
assistance of the administrator
of special education coordinates
the delivery and supervision of
special education services
within each school building.
CR 25
Institutional
SelfEvaluation
Partially
Implemented
Document
Review
Interviews
The principal ensures that
documentation on the use of
instructional support services
for the student is provided as
part of the evaluation
information reviewed by the
Team when determining
eligibility.
Interviews indicate that some
aspects of the institutional selfevaluation are considered by
administration.
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 26 of 33
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
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
Requirements
by the evaluation.
ELE Criteria
Current CPR criteria available by scrolling down to the monitoring instruments at http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/default.html
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
ELE 1
Annual
Assessment
ELE 2
MCAS
Participation
ELE 3
Initial
Identification
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

√
√
Partially
Implemented
Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
The district’s self-assessment indicates that district annually assesses
the English proficiency of all limited English proficient (LEP)
students.
The district’s self-assessment indicates that LEP students participate
in the annual administration of the MCAS examination as required
and in accordance with Department guidelines.
While the district’s self-assessment indicates that some elements of this
criterion are implemented, the home language survey is not translated
and the district does not assess all students when second language is
present on the home language survey responses, but only assesses
students when the survey indicates that the student is a foreign language
speaker.
Once students are referred for assessment, however, the district
reports that it uses qualified staff and appropriate procedures and
assessments to identify students who are limited-English-proficient
and to assess their level of English proficiency in reading, writing,
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 27 of 33
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Provide copies of the home language survey that
have been translated into the major languages
spoken in the district. Submit copies by November
14, 2008.
Revise the district’s procedures to ensure that
initial identification assessments are conducted for
all students whose home language survey indicates
a home language other than English.
Revise the district’s procedures to ensure that
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
speaking, and listening.
parents are not permitted to decline testing for
initial identification.
The district allows parents to decline testing for identification as an
English language learner. This is not appropriate.
In addition, documentation indicates that a qualified person is not
administering the home language survey.
ELE 4
Waiver
Procedures
ELE 5
Program
Placement
and Structure
√
Partially
Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Provide the revised procedures by November 14,
2008.
Provide a description of the district’s means for
ensuring that qualified persons administer the
home language survey by November 14, 2008.
The self-assessment indicates that the district utilizes waiver forms
provided on the Department’s website.
Some professional development in teaching LEP students has been
offered to teachers in an effort to provide a sheltered English
immersion model. However, only some staff are trained in one or two
categories, and ELL students are not assigned to these staff.
The district provides ESL/ELD instruction through the use of
paraprofessionals, instead of by appropriately licensed staff.
The district did not indicate whether it uses assessment data to plan
and implement educational programs for students at different
instructional levels.
Implement a professional development plan that
provides teachers and administrators with high
quality training, as prescribed by the Department,
in (1) second language learning and teaching; (2)
sheltering content instruction; (3) assessment of
speaking and listening; and (4) teaching reading
and writing to limited English proficient students.
The district must provide training opportunities to
teachers of LEP students that ensure the progress
of LEP students in developing oral comprehension,
speaking, reading, and writing of English, and in
meeting academic standards. Provide the district’s
professional development plan for SEI training and
the licensure information (copy of license or
waiver) of English language development
instructors. Submit this information by November
14, 2008.
Provide the district’s plan for ensuring that all ELL
students receive ESL/ELD instruction provided by
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 28 of 33
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
appropriately licensed staff. Provide this plan by
November 14, 2008.
ELE 6
Program Exit
and
Readiness
ELE 7
Parent
Involvement
Partially
Implemented
Partially
Implemented
Exit criteria submitted with the district’s self-assessment are
inappropriate because they only permit a student to exit the ELL
program in January or the end of the school year, and because they
base the decision on LAS and MEPA -- stating that so long as
students are competent literate (on the LAS) they can be exited. The
district should ensure that it does not re-designate a student from
limited English proficient (LEP) to formerly limited English
proficient (FLEP) until he or she is deemed English proficient and can
participate meaningfully in all aspects of the district’s general
education program without the use of adapted or simplified English
materials. See Department guidance at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/ell/sei/MEPA_guidelines.doc.
The district’s self–assessment states that parent involvement is a
priority. The home language survey, though in English only, does
contain a question asking what language parents would like notices in;
sample home language surveys included several in which parents
asked for translated documentation. However, the district did not
submit any translated documents, and interviews indicate that nothing
is currently translated. In addition, it is not clear what means have
been developed to include parents or guardians of LEP students in
matters pertaining to their children’s education, and to determine
whether parents require translated documents or interpretation in
order to participate in their children’s education.
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 29 of 33
Indicate whether the district uses assessment data
to plan and implement educational programs for
students at different instructional levels, and, if not,
provide a plan to remedy this by November 14,
2008.
Revise the exit criteria consistent with Department
guidance referenced in the previous column.
Ensure that exit criteria include consideration of
multiple measures, including but not limited to the
following: MEPA results, grades, teacher
observation, and local criteria for grade
advancement. Also ensure that the district does not
cap or limit the amount of time in which an LEP
student can remain in a language support program.
Submit the new procedures by November 14,
2008.
Submit evidence of parent outreach at all levels,
including a description of the means of including
parents or guardians of LEP students in matters
pertaining to their children’s education. Also
include the means by which the district will ensure
that translated documentation and interpreters are
provided when needed. Provide this description,
including evidence of the above, by November 14,
2008.
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

ELE 8
Declining
Entry to a
Program
ELE 9
Instructional
Grouping
Partially
Implemented
ELE 10
Parental
Notification
Partially
Implemented
√
Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
The district submitted appropriate procedures for declining entry to a
program, including providing supports to students whose parents have
declined entry to an ELL program.
While the district rates this criterion as implemented, due to other
issues with the ELL program as identified in other criteria, in
particular ELE 5 and 14, the district has not demonstrated that it
ensures that LEP students receive effective content instruction at
appropriate academic levels and that ESL/ELD instruction is at the
appropriate proficiency level and based on the English Language
Proficiency Benchmarks and Outcomes.
The district’s parent notification form lacks appropriate content.
Specifically, the form does not include information about the waiver,
the level of English proficiency, and the program placement and
method of instruction.
In addition, the parent notification form is currently not translated,
though the district is working on this concern.
See ELE 5 and 14.
The district must create a notice that meets all
requirements of this criterion. Specifically, the
following is required for parental notification:
the reasons for identification of the student as
LEP;
the child’s level of English proficiency;
program placement and/or the method of
instruction used in the program;
the parents’ right to apply for a waiver (see ELE
4), or to decline to enroll their child in the program
(see ELE 8).
Please note that the notice should be sent annually.
Provide the new notice and evidence that it has
been provided to appropriate district personnel by
November 14, 2008. Provide evidence that the
notice can be translated, if necessary, by
November 14, 2008.
Conduct a review of the records of all ELL
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 30 of 33
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
ELE 11
Equal Access
to Academic
Programs
and Services
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

Partially
Implemented
Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
ELL students currently do not participate fully with peers because
ESL/ELD instruction is being provided by non-certified personnel. In
addition, because the district does not currently provide SEI
instruction, the district does not ensure that LEP students are taught to
the same academic standards and curriculum as all students, and does
not provide them the same opportunities to master such standards as
other students. See ELE 5.
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
students enrolled in the district during the 20082009 school year. Provide a report of the review
including the following:
Role of staff completing review;
 Number of records reviewed;
 Number of records which contained
appropriate notices that meet the content
requirements of this criterion;
 Number of records in which parents
required translated documentation;
 Number of records in which translated
notices were found;
 Actions taken by the district to remedy any
non-compliance found as a result of this
review.
Provide a report of this review March 16, 2009.
See ELE 5. Provide a description of the means by
which the district ensures that ELL students have
equal access to academic programs and services,
including guidance and counseling, as required by
this criterion.
Provide this description, and evidence of its
implementation by November 14, 2008.
The district does not have a means of ensuring that LEP students have
the opportunity to receive support services, such as guidance and
counseling, in a language that the student understands.
ELE 12
Equal Access
Partially
The district reported that ELL students participate in non-academic
and extra-curricular activities such as athletics and clubs. However,
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 31 of 33
Provide a description of the means by which the
district will ensure that LEP students have equal
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
to
Nonacademic
and
Extracurricular
Programs
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

Implemented
ELE 13
Follow-up
Support
√
ELE 14
Licensure
Requirements
Not implemented
Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
given issues with translation, it is not clear how the district provides
appropriate support, where necessary, to LEP students to ensure that
they have equal access to the nonacademic programs and
extracurricular activities available to their English-speaking peers.
Information is not currently provided to LEP students or their parents
about extracurricular activities and school events in a language they
understand.
The district reports that it monitors students who have exited the ELL
program. The district actively monitors students who have exited the
ELL program for two years and provides language support services to
those students, if needed.
The district does not currently employ an appropriately licensed ESL
teacher.
See ELE 5.
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 32 of 33
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
access to non-academic and extra-curricular
programs and services. Provide this description,
and evidence of its implementation by November
14, 2008.
See ELE 5.
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
ELE 15
Professional
Development
Requirements
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
See ELE 5.
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Submit the roster of staff taking part in SEI
training, per ELE 5. On the roster include the
names, grade levels and ELE/SEI training topics
that staff have taken part in or are scheduled to
participate in. Submit this information by March
16, 2009.
Partially
Implemented
Provide a list of the district’s ELL students (by
initials) and the teachers to whom they are
assigned by March 16, 2009.
ELE 16
Equitable
Facilities
ELE 17
Program
Evaluation
√
Partially
Implemented
ELL students are provided with facilities, materials and services
comparable to those provided to the overall student population.
The district has hired a consultant to conduct periodic evaluations of
the effectiveness of its ELE program in developing students’ English
language skills and increasing their ability to participate meaningfully
in the educational program.
ELE 18
Records of
LEP
Students(To be
reviewed
during next
CPR visit.)
Millis Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
September 17, 2008
Page 33 of 33
Submit the report of the ELE program evaluation
by March 16, 2009.