Massachusetts Department of
Elementary and Secondary Education
75 Pleasant Street, Malden, Massachusetts 02148-4096
Telephone: (781) 338-3700
TTY: N.E.T. Relay 1-800-439-237
January 6, 2012
Brian Lee Salzer, Superintendent
Northampton Public Schools
212 Main Street
Northampton, MA, 01060
Re: Mid-cycle Report
Dear Superintendent Salzer:
Enclosed is the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education's Mid-cycle Report based on the
onsite visit conducted in your district in October, 2011. During the Mid-cycle Review the Department
monitored selected special education criteria to determine your district’s compliance with special
education laws and regulations. The review consisted of information gathered from one or more of the
following activities: staff interviews, review of student records, examination of documentation, and/or
classroom observation.
We are pleased to tell you that the Department has found your district to be in compliance with all of the
criteria monitored in your district during the Mid-cycle Review. The findings of the Department are
included in the enclosed report. You and your entire staff are to be congratulated for your success in
implementing the requirements included in these criteria.
The Department will notify you of your district's next regularly scheduled Coordinated Program Review
(CPR) several months before it is to occur. At this time we anticipate that this CPR will occur sometime
during the 2014-2015 school year unless the Department determines that there is some reason to schedule
this visit earlier.
Your staff's cooperation throughout this Mid-cycle Review is appreciated. If you have questions about
this letter or the enclosed report, please do not hesitate to contact Marc Oldenburg at 413-314-6707.
1
Sincerely,
Marc Oldenburg, Mid-cycle Review Chairperson
Program Quality Assurance Services
Darlene A. Lynch, Director
Program Quality Assurance Services
cc:
Mitchell D. Chester, Ed.D., Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education
Jean Jonker, Interim Supervisor, Program Quality Assurance Services
David Narkewicz, School Committee Chairperson
Nathaniel Ziegler, Local Program Review Coordinator
Encs:
Mid-cycle Report
2
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE REPORT
Northampton Public Schools
Dates of the Mid-cycle Review Onsite: October 26-27, 2011
Date of this Report: January 6, 2012
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS REPORT IS IN TWO SECTIONS.
Required Special Education Criteria Monitored in this Mid-cycle Review
Current special education criteria available by scrolling down to the special education instrument at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/default.html
Criterion
SE 7
Transfer of
parental
rights and
student
participation
and consent
at age of
majority
Criterion
Implemented


Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
Student Records
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that the district
discusses the transfer of rights prior to
reaching the age of majority and
provides notice to the parent(s) and
student one year before the student
obtains the age of majority. Upon
reaching 18, the district procures
consent from students to continue their
special education program.
Interview
If Partially Implemented or
Not Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and
Timelines for
Implementation
Northampton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 6, 2012
Page 1 of 11
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
Criterion
SE 8
IEP Team
composition
and
attendance
Criterion
Implemented


Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
Student Records
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that all required
members of the Team are present at
Team meetings. Also, the district does
employ the use of written parental
excusals for the absence of any Team
member. When a Team member’s
participation is required, the excused
member provides written input for the
development of the IEP prior to the
scheduled meeting.
Interviews
Student Records
Interviews
SE 18A
IEP
development
and content

If Partially Implemented or
Not Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and
Timelines for
Implementation
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that the IEP is
completed using the elements of the
most current IEP format provided by
the Department, and IEPs are not
changed at a higher administrative
level. When 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, or if the student
has a disability identified on the autism
spectrum the IEP Team considers and
addresses the skills and proficiencies
Northampton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 6, 2012
Page 2 of 11
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
Criterion
Criterion
Implemented

Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
If Partially Implemented or
Not Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and
Timelines for
Implementation
needed to avoid and respond to
bullying, harassment, or teasing.
Student Records
Interviews

SE 25
Parental
consent
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that the school
district obtains written parental consent
before conducting an initial evaluation
and before making an initial placement
or initiating extended evaluations. If
the district is unable to obtain consent
after initial evaluation and/or
placement, and the district determines
this action is a denial of FAPE,
resolution through BSEA is sought.
Furthermore, the district informs the
parent that consent may be revoked at
any time in writing, and at the time of
revocation the district discontinues all
special education services and informs
the parents on how to obtain a copy of
their procedural safeguards.
Northampton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 6, 2012
Page 3 of 11
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
Additional Special Education Criteria Monitored in this Mid-cycle Review
Current special education criteria available by scrolling down to the special education instrument at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/default.html
Criterion
Criterion
Implemented

SE 1
Assessments are
appropriately
selected

SE 2
Required and
optional
assessments

Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
Student
Records
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that
assessments are tailored to
assess specific areas of
educational need and related
developmental needs of a
student. Assessments are
provided and administered in
the language and form most
likely to yield accurate
information on what the student
knows and can do
academically, developmentally,
and functionally.
Interviews
Student
Records
Interviews
If Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and Timelines for
Implementation
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that students
are assessed in all areas of
suspected disability. Also, the
Northampton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 6, 2012
Page 4 of 11
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
Criterion
Criterion
Implemented

Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
If Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and Timelines for
Implementation
district does not remove related
services from service delivery
grids without students’ achieving
their goals or conducting
comprehensive assessments in the
areas of disability.
SE 4
Reporting of
assessment
results

SE 9
Timeline for
eligibility

Student
Records
Interviews
Student
Records
Interviews
SE 9A
Elements of the
eligibility

Student
Records
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that
summaries of assessments are
completed prior to discussion by
the Team and are made available
to parents at least two days in
advance of the Team meeting
when requested by parents.
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that, across all
levels, the district does meet
timeline requirements for the
determination of eligibility.
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that the
district documents whether a
Northampton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 6, 2012
Page 5 of 11
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
Criterion
Criterion
Implemented

determination
SE 12
Frequency of reevaluation

Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
Interviews
limited English proficient (LEP)
student’s lack of progress is the
result of a disability or a lack of
instruction, as a part of the special
education eligibility process. Also,
students are not identified as
eligible for special education
services due to a lack of
instruction in reading or
mathematics.
Student
Records
Interviews
SE 13
Progress reports

Student
Records
Interviews
If Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and Timelines for
Implementation
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that the
district always conducts a reevaluation every three years.
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that progress
reports do report on the student’s
progress towards reaching the
goals set forth in the IEP. The
district does conduct Team
meetings to review and revise IEPs
when progress reports indicate that
the student is not learning as
expected.
Northampton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 6, 2012
Page 6 of 11
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
Criterion
SE 14
Revision/Review
of IEPs
Criterion
Implemented


Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
Student
Records
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that the
district conducts annual review
meetings and develops IEPs prior
to the expiration of the former IEP.
Interviews
SE 18B
IEP
determination
and placement

SE 20
Least restrictive
environment

Student
Records
Interviews
Student
Records
Interviews
If Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and Timelines for
Implementation
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that the
district does provide the parent
with two copies of the proposed
IEP and proposed placement along
with the required notice
immediately following the
development of the IEP.
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that the
program selected is the least
restrictive environment for
students. The district has academic
supports for students in reading, as
well as in content area classes. The
Team states why the student’s
removal from the general
Northampton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 6, 2012
Page 7 of 11
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
Criterion
Criterion
Implemented

Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
If Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and Timelines for
Implementation
education classroom is considered
critical to their program and the
removal is not solely because of
needed modification in the
curriculum. Also, placement
decisions are determined by the
Team and consideration is given to
any potential harm effect on the
student or the quality of the
services he or she needs.
SE 22
IEP
implementation
and availability

Student
Records
Interviews
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that the
school district does provide the
mutually agreed upon services
without delay upon acceptance of
the IEP, and the district does have
an IEP in effect at the beginning of
the school year. Teachers and
providers described in the IEP are
informed of their specific
responsibilities related to the
student’s IEP and the specific
accommodations, modifications,
and supports that must be provided
for the student under it. Also,
when related services are
Northampton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 6, 2012
Page 8 of 11
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
Criterion
Criterion
Implemented

Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
If Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and Timelines for
Implementation
interrupted the school district
informs parents in writing of any
delayed services, reasons for
delay, and actions that the school
district is taking to address these
delays.
SE 24
Notice to parent

Student
Records
Interviews
SE 29
Communications
in
English/primary
Language

Student
Records
Interviews
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that the
district’s Notice of Proposed
School District Action (N1) meets
all of the federal content
requirements regarding its’
proposal or refusal to initiate or
change the identification,
evaluation, or educational
placement of all students on IEPs.
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that
communications are translated into
the primary language of the home.
When oral notices or other modes
of communication that are not
written language are provided, the
district does consistently document
Northampton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 6, 2012
Page 9 of 11
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
Criterion
Criterion
Implemented

Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
If Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and Timelines for
Implementation
(1) that it has provided such notice
in an alternate manner, (2) the
content of the notice, and (3) the
steps taken to ensure that the
parent understands the content of
the notice.
SE 34
Continuum of
services

Student
Records
Interviews
SE 43
Behavioral
interventions

Student
Records
Interviews
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that the
district has a continuum of
services to support the needs of all
special needs students (pre-k
through 12) including inclusion,
reading/writing/math supports,
behavioral therapeutic supports,
resource rooms, pull-out supports,
Occupational Therapy, Physical
Therapy, Speech and Language,
Life Skills, Alternative Learning,
Developmental Education, and
Transitional Planning.
Review of student records and
interviews indicated that IEP
Teams do routinely identify and
include behavioral supports or
Northampton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 6, 2012
Page 10 of 11
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
Criterion
Criterion
Implemented

Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
If Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and Timelines for
Implementation
services when developing IEPs for
students whose behaviors impede
their learning.
SE 53
Use of
Paraprofessionals

Student
Records
Interviews
Staff interviews indicated that
paraprofessionals are supervised
by an appropriately certified or
licensed professional who is
proximate and readily available to
provide such supervision in all
schools.
Northampton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
January 6, 2012
Page 11 of 11
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements