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 30, 2007
Richard Smith
Superintendent of Schools
North Attleborough Public Schools
6 Morse Street
North Attleborough, MA 02760
Re: Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report
Dear Superintendent Smith:
Enclosed is the Department of Education's Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report (MidCycle Report). This report contains findings based on onsite monitoring conducted to verify the
implementation and effectiveness of corrective action approved or ordered by the Department to
address findings of noncompliance included in the North Attleborough Coordinated Program
Review Report issued on June 15, 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 in the area of English learner education (ELE). (In the
remainder of this letter, please read “district” as meaning “school district or charter school.”) 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 (documentation and any written analysis of compliance) and, based
solely on that self-assessment, is providing you in this report with findings on your ELE program
and the corresponding 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 781338-3534. ELE guidance documents are available on the Department’s website at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/ell/ .
The onsite team would like to commend the following programs and practices that were brought
to its attention and that the team believes have a significant positive impact on the education of
students enrolled in the North Attleborough Public Schools. These programs and practices are as
follows:
The district has made efforts to include all students into the life of their schools. They are
aware of the benefits of locating special education classes in locations that promote
integration and minimize separation and stigmatization of eligible students. Project
1
Teammates was initiated at the high school to promote inclusive practices. Through this
program regular education students have become involved in a collaborative class of
student thus providing increased opportunities for disabled students to interact with their
peers.
All students benefit from the services of a vocational counselor who can attend Team
meetings and help students explore vocational opportunities. Summer job experiences
are supported as the counselor works with interested students and employers willing to
give students the opportunity to explore their interests.
The Department will notify you of your district's next regularly scheduled Coordinated Program
Review several months before it is to occur. At this time we anticipate that this CPR will occur
sometime during the 2010 unless the Department determines that there is some reason to schedule
this visit earlier.
In all instances where noncompliance has been found, the Department has prescribed corrective
action for the district that must be implemented without delay. You will find these requirements
for corrective action included in the attached report, along with requirements for progress
reporting. Please provide the Department with your written assurance that all of the Department's
requirements for corrective action will be implemented by your district within the timelines
specified. You must submit your statement of assurance to me by January 24, 2007.
Your staff's cooperation throughout this Mid-cycle Review is appreciated. Should you like
clarification of any part of our report, please do not hesitate to contact me at 781-338-3714.
Sincerely,
Nancy Hicks, Mid-cycle Review Chairperson
Program Quality Assurance Services
Darlene A. Lynch, Director
Program Quality Assurance Services
c:
David P. Driscoll, Commissioner of Education
David Manoogian, School Committee Chairperson
Margo Brissette, District Program Review Follow-up Coordinator
Encl.: Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report
2
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT
North Attleborough Public Schools
ONSITE MONITORING OF IMPLEMENTATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION AND OF CERTAIN NEW REQUIREMENTS
Date of Coordinated Program Review (CPR): February 26, 2004-March 5, 2004
Date of Coordinated Program Review Corrective Action Plan Approval: October 7, 2004
Dates of Corrective Action Plan Progress Reports: October 18, 2004, February 25, 2005, May 16, 2005 and October 15, 2005
Dates of this Mid-cycle Review Onsite Visit: January 4 and 5, 2007
Date of this Report: January 30, 2007
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS REPORT IS IN SEVERAL SECTIONS.
North Attleborough Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 30, 2007
Page 1 of 13
Criterion
Number/Topic
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

Student
records
SE 18 A
IEP Content
Partial
Student
records
If a student is removed from the
general education classroom at any
time, the IEP included a statement
indicating why the removal was
considered critical and the basis for
the conclusion.
Some IEPs clearly indicated what
the student would need to do to
achieve the IEP goal and how it
would be measured.
SE 24
Notice

Student
records
SE 48
FAPE

(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Some IEPs, however,
contained goals that were
not measurable and they did
not always include
information on how progress
would be measured.
By April 1, 2007, provide a
schedule of proposed training on
writing measurable goals and a list
of those who will be included in
the training.
Special Ed.
Criteria Cited
in CPR Report
and Monitored
in Mid-cycle
SE 20
#2
Least Restrictive
Program
Interviews
Partial
Notice, provided when the district
proposed an IEP or informed the
parent of a finding of no eligibility,
contained all required questions
and the questions were consistently
addressed.
The district has made efforts to
include Bi-County Collaborative
students into the life of the school.
Schedules were changed so that
collaborative students at the
Community School have lunch
North Attleborough Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 30, 2007
Page 2 of 13
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
SE 54
Professional
Development
SE 55
Special
Education
Classrooms
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective


Documentation and
interviews

Interviews
Community
School Tour
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
with age appropriate students.
Students are encouraged at the high
school to take part in school
activities and Project Teammates
has supported reverse integration in
a collaborative class.
Professional development has been
provided in the required areas.
Teachers have all been trained in
analyzing and accommodating
diverse learning styles of all
students and methods of
collaboration among teachers,
paraprofessionals and teacher
assistants.
The location of special education
facilities and classrooms are
accessible and minimize the
separation or stigmatization of
eligible students.
North Attleborough Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 30, 2007
Page 3 of 13
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Special
Education
Criteria created
or revised in
response to
IDEA-2004
SE 6 ##1 - 3
Determination
of Transition
Services
SE 8
IEP Team
composition and
Criterion
Implemented


Partial
Method(s) of
Verification
Student
records and
interviews
and
documentation
Student
records and
interviews
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Age appropriate students are
consistently invited to and attend
Team meetings. Students’ interests
and long team goals are included in
the IEP.
The district utilizes the Transitional
Planning Chart when considering
the need for transitional goals and
transition services at the Team
meeting.
Note that consistent with the
recently enacted IDEA-2004
regulations, the transition planning
chart will become a mandated
form, which should be maintained
with the student’s IEP. Refer to
Administrative Advisory SPED
2007-1 for guidance. The
Department is currently revising
this form, please check the
Department’s Special Education
website for updates and review the
new requirements for transition
planning and services with
appropriate staff. No additional
progress report is required.
The district has a vocational
counselor who often attends Team
meetings when one purpose of the
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Partial
Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented or
Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Team meetings at the high
school and middle school do
not always have a regular
By April 1, 2007, the district must
develop and provide a procedure
to ensure that regular education
North Attleborough Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 30, 2007
Page 4 of 13
Team meeting is to discuss
vocational education needs.
attendance
SE 12
Frequency of reevaluation
SE 13
Progress
Reports and
content


Student
records and
interviews
and
documentation
Student
records and
interviews
and
documentation
education teacher in
attendance when the student
is involved or may be
involved in a regular
education program.
The district conducts reevaluations
as required every three years except
when the parent and district agree
that it is unnecessary. The district
has not coordinated the dates of the
evaluation with the annual review.
Often there are two Team meetings
scheduled within a short period of
time, which may challenge the
district’s ability to ensure that all
required Team members are in
attendance.
Progress reports contain the
required information and are issued
with required frequency. When a
student’s eligibility terminates
because the student has graduated
or exceeded the age of eligibility, a
summary of academic achievement
and functional performance is
provided.
Please note that recently enacted
IDEA-2004 regulations have now
changed the content requirements
for IEP progress reports. Refer to
Administrative Advisory SPED
2007-1 for guidance. The
Department has changed the
progress report form and it is now
available on the Department’s
Special Education website at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/iep/
eng_toc.html.
North Attleborough Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 30, 2007
Page 5 of 13
teachers attend Team meetings at
the high school and middle school.
Copies of a sample of five Team
meeting attendance sheets from
meetings scheduled in February or
March 2007 at both the middle
school and high school must be
provided.
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
SE 14
Review and
revision of IEPs
SE 25B
Resolution of
disputes
SE 33
Involvement in
the General
Curriculum
SE 39A
Procedures for
services to
eligible private
school students
whose parents
reside in the
district
Criterion
Implemented





Method(s) of
Verification
Student
records,
interviews
and
documentation
Interviews
and
documentation
Interviews
and
documentation
Interviews
and
documentation
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Determined to
be Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented or
Not Implemented
The district reviews the IEP
annually on or before the
anniversary date of the IEP. When
the district and parent agrees to
make changes to the student’s IEP
without convening a meeting of the
Team, it is not clear how the
changes are being documented. An
amendment to the IEP could be
used to document the agreed to
changes.
The district is aware of their
responsibility regarding the
resolution of disputes when a
parent requests an official hearing.
They have not, however had the
occasion to schedule such a
meeting.
The district documents the
student’s participation in the
general curriculum in the IEP. See
SE 8 regarding the requirement to
have in attendance at the Team
meeting one member who is
familiar with the general
curriculum.
The district provides services to
five eligible students enrolled at
private expense in private schools.
They have completed the
Proportionate Share Worksheet.
Please note that consistent with
recently enacted IDEA-2004
North Attleborough Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 30, 2007
Page 6 of 13
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
regulations, the public school
district’s procedures for
consultation with private schools
requires the public school to obtain
written affirmation of the private
school representative’s
participation.
Refer to Administrative Advisory
SPED 2007-1 for guidance.
(SE 39A does not
apply to charter
schools or
vocational
schools)
SE 39B
Procedures for
services to
eligible students
in private
schools in the
district whose
parents reside
out of state

Interviews
and
documentation
The district was aware of their
obligation regarding eligible
students in private schools whose
parents reside out of state. They do
not have any students at this time.
Student
records and
interviews
The district has procedures in place
to track student suspensions.
Student records contained a
detailed summary of a
Manifestation Determination
meeting. In response to a finding
in a Problem Resolution
investigation with the Department,
the district is in the process of
including in the high school
handbook the procedures for
suspension of students with
disabilities.
(SE 39B does not
apply to charter
schools or
vocational
schools)
SE 46
Procedures for
suspension of
students with
disabilities more
than 10 days

North Attleborough Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 30, 2007
Page 7 of 13
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
Civil Rights
(MOA) and
Other General
Education
Requirements
MOA 17A
Physical
Restraints
MOA 21
Civil Rights
Training
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s) of
Verification

Documentation and
interviews

Documentation and
interviews
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or Ineffective
Or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Consistent with regulatory
requirements, the district has
implemented staff training on the
use of restraint within the first
month of school.
The district has provided training
for all school personnel at least
annually regarding civil rights
responsibilities.
North Attleborough Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 30, 2007
Page 8 of 13
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Requirements
Other Regulated
Programs
Monitored
During this
Mid-cycle
Review
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
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

SE 7

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
Interviews indicate that
students were being asked to
make the age of majority
decision at age 17. In one
student record a 17-year-old
signed the IEP. Regulations
require that one year prior to
the student reaching age 18,
the district informs the
student of the transfer of
rights at the age of majority.
This discussion takes place
at the Team meeting and is
documented in the IEP under
Additional Information.
Upon reaching 18, the
student’s decision regarding
the age of majority must be
documented.
By April 1, 2007, the district must
submit an agenda and sign-in
sheet of training on the Age of
Majority Decision documentation
within the IEP. Provide a copy of
an IEP of a 17 year-old and 18
year old whose Team meeting
took place following the training.
North Attleborough Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 30, 2007
Page 9 of 13
North Attleborough Public Schools
English Learner Education (ELE) Requirements
Mid-Cycle Review Findings and Corrective Action Based on the Department’s Review Of Local Self-Assessments
(Please refer to full text of 2006-2007 CPR requirements for ELE and related implementation guidance at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/instrument/chapter71A.doc )
ELE Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented Based
on Review of Local
ELE SelfAssessment

ELE 1
Annual
Assessment

ELE 2
MCAS
Participation

ELE 3
Initial
Identification

ELE 4
Waiver
Procedures

Not all teachers providing content instruction to limited English proficient
students have received training in sheltered English instruction.
ELE 5
Program
Placement and
Structure
ELE 6
Program Exit
and Readiness
Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)

North Attleborough Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 30, 2007
Page 10 of 13
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
By April 1, 2007 provide a list of teachers who are
providing instruction to LEP students along with the
date that training in SEI was or will be completed.
ELE Criterion
Number
and
Topic
ELE 7
Parent
Involvement
ELE 8
Declining
Entry to a
Program
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented Based
on Review of Local
ELE SelfAssessment



ELE 9
Instructional
Grouping

ELE 10
Parental
Notification

ELE 11
Equal Access
to Academic
Programs and
Services

ELE 12
Equal Access
to
Nonacademic
and Extracurricular
Programs
ELE 13
Follow-up
Support
Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)


North Attleborough Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 30, 2007
Page 11 of 13
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
ELE Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented Based
on Review of Local
ELE SelfAssessment

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
ELE 14
Licensure
Requirements
LEP students are not all receiving English as a second language instruction
by a licensed ESL teacher.
By April 1, 2007, provide an explanation of how the
district will ensure that all LEP students receive English
as a second language instruction by a qualified teacher.
ELE 15
Professional
Development
Requirements
Not all teachers of LEP students have had training in sheltered English
instruction.
Please see ELE 5.
ELE 16
Equitable
Facilities

ELE 17
Program
Evaluation

ELE 18
Records of
LEP Students(To be
reviewed
during next
CPR visit.)
Mid-cycle Report Format 2007.doc
Rev. 1/3/07
North Attleborough Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 30, 2007
Page 12 of 13