COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
MID-CYCLE REPORT
District: Millis Public Schools
MCR Onsite Dates: 01/08/2013
Program Area: Special Education
Mitchell D. Chester, Ed.D.
Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
MID-CYCLE REPORT
SE Criterion # 7 - Transfer of parental rights at age of majority and
student participation and consent at the age of majority
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Document review, student records and staff interviews indicate that the district routinely
provides students and parents notice of the transfer of education decision-making rights to the
student upon age of majority one year prior to the student reaching age 18. This notice
includes that the parent will continue to receive written notices and have access to the student
record. The district documents this notification of the transference of educational decisionmaking rights to the student and family in the Additional Information section of the IEP.
Upon students’ reaching the age of 18, the district immediately secures student consent to
continue IEP services or, as appropriate, continues to secure the consent of the guardian.
SE Criterion # 8 - IEP Team composition and attendance
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Review of student records and staff interviews indicate that the district’s IEP Teams are
consistently convened with all required members in attendance. When a required Team
member cannot participate in an IEP Team meeting, the district secures written parent
permission prior to the meeting to excuse the Team member. In addition, the excused
required Team member provides a written report in advance for the IEP Team to use in
developing or reviewing the IEP. If the parent does not wish to convene the IEP Team
meeting without the required member, the district reschedules the meeting. A review of the
district’s procedures also demonstrates that the district has a process to excuse Team
members whose areas are not being modified or discussed at the Team meeting.
SE Criterion # 17 - Initiation of services at age three and Early
Intervention transition procedures
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Documentation, student records and staff interviews indicate that the district has established
procedures that ensure effective transition from Early Intervention (EI) programs and other
referring sources before the child turns two-and-one-half years old, so that IEP services are
provided by the child's third birthday. Specifically, district documentation and staff interviews
demonstrate the district’s collaboration with local EI programs to ensure consistent and timely
district participation in all areas of early intervention transition, including participation in
transition meetings with EI, conducting observations and evaluations no less than 90 days
before the child’s third birthday, and including EI staff in the initial IEP meeting.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
Millis Mid-Cycle Report – April 9, 2013 03:50:02 PM
Page 2 of 4
SE Criterion # 18A - IEP development and content
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Review of student records, documentation, and staff interviews demonstrate that whenever
the IEP Team evaluation indicates that a student's disability affects social skills development,
or when the student's disability makes him or her vulnerable to bullying, harassment, or
teasing, the IEP addresses the skills and proficiencies needed to avoid and respond to
bullying, harassment, or teasing. The discussion is documented under “Additional
Information” within the IEP, along with appropriate goals and benchmarks documented in the
IEP and service delivery grid.
For students identified with a disability on the autism spectrum, the IEP Team considers and
specifically addresses the skills and proficiencies needed to avoid and respond to bullying,
harassment, or teasing. The IEPs state explicitly how the student will receive social and
communications skills or self-advocacy skills to address or avoid bullying, harassment and
teasing in the sections for Present Levels of Performance, goals and benchmarks, and
service delivery grid, as well as under Additional Information.
In all cases where the IEP Team considers and/or addresses the skills and proficiencies
students need to avoid and respond to bullying, harassment, or teasing, the district
documents this consideration on the Notice of Proposed School District Action (N1), which
accompanies the proposed IEP.
SE Criterion # 24 - Notice to parent regarding proposal or refusal to
initiate or change the identification, evaluation, or educational placement
of the child or the provision of FAPE
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Review of student records indicates that the district consistently sends the Notice of Proposed
School District Action (N1) to propose an evaluation within five days of a referral. Records
demonstrate that the consent form includes complete information on the reason for the
referral, any rejected options considered by the district, the evaluations and tests proposed by
the district, additional relevant factors for the evaluation, and the district’s next steps. In
addition, records showed that the notice includes the name and phone number of the special
education administrator or her designee, so that the parent can discuss the reasons for the
referral and the areas of need with the district. Interviews also demonstrate that the district
sends the Parent's Notice of Procedural Safeguards to parents with every consent form.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
Millis Mid-Cycle Report – April 9, 2013 03:50:02 PM
Page 3 of 4
SE Criterion # 25 - Parental consent
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
According to staff interviews, the district has not had any requests for revocation of special
education services within the past two years. According to document review, the district’s
procedures require that the parent revoke consent for special education services in writing.
Upon receiving the parent’s written request, the district will immediately send a notice
indicating that the student’s special education services will be discontinued within a
reasonable period of time and where parents can obtain a copy of procedural safeguards.
Document review and staff interviews indicate that these procedures also state that the
district will not use mediation or request a due process hearing to obtain agreement or a
ruling requiring the continuation of services.
SE Criterion # 26 - Parent participation in meetings
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
The district provided its special education student roster as required by the Department.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
Millis Mid-Cycle Report – April 9, 2013 03:50:02 PM
Page 4 of 4