Massachusetts Department of
Elementary and Secondary Education
75 Pleasant Street, Malden, Massachusetts 02148-4096
Telephone: (781) 338-3700
TTY: N.E.T. Relay 1-800-439-2370
June 6, 2011
Jed F. Lippard
Head of School
Prospect Hill Academy Charter School
50 Essex St.
Cambridge, MA 02139
Re: Mid-cycle Report
Dear Mr. Lippard:
Enclosed is the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education's Mid-cycle Report based on the
onsite visit conducted in your district on April 25, 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: interviews, review of student records, examination of documentation, and classroom
observation(s).
The Department determined that one or more of the criteria monitored in your district was “Partially
Implemented” or “Not Implemented.” In all instances where noncompliance was found, the Department
has prescribed corrective action for the district. This corrective action must be implemented 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 submitting progress reports
using the enclosed form.
Please provide the Department with your written assurance that all of the required corrective action will be
implemented by your district within the timelines specified in the report. You must submit your statement
of assurance to Darlene Lynch, Director, Program Quality Assurance Services, by June 20, 2011.
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 Paul J. Aguiar at 781-338-3781.
Sincerely,
Paul J. Aguiar, 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
Dean Paolillo, Supervisor, Program Quality Assurance Services
Parviz Parvizi, Board of Trustees Chairperson
Stacy Camposano, Local Program Review Coordinator
Encs:
Mid-cycle Report
Mid-cycle Progress Report Form
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE REPORT
PROSPECT HILL ACADEMY CHARTER SCHOOL
Dates of the Mid-cycle Review Onsite: April 25, 2011
Date of this Report: June 6, 2011
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
at age of
majority and
student
participation
and consent at
the age of
majority
Criterion
Implemented


Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Student
Records
Interviews
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
If Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and
Timelines for Implementation
Student records and staff
interviews indicated that the charter
school informed both the student
and the parent one year before
reaching age 18 of the student’s
right at age 18 to make all
decisions in relation to special
education programs and services.
Student records and staff
interviews also indicated that upon
reaching the age of 18, the charter
school documented when the
Prospect Hill Academy Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 6, 2011
Page 1 of 7
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
Criterion
SE 52A
Registration
of
educational
interpreters
Criterion
Implemented


Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Document
Review
Interviews
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
If Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and
Timelines for Implementation
student’s decision was to share or
delegate decision-making.
The charter school provided a
statement of assurance that there
are no students currently enrolled
who would require an interpreter;
however, should such students
enroll, the district will employ an
educational interpreter registered
with the Massachusetts
Commission for the Deaf and Hard
of Hearing.
Prospect Hill Academy Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 6, 2011
Page 2 of 7
(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
SE 6
Determination
of Transition
Services
Criterion
Implemented

Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)

Method(s) of
Investigation
Student
Records
Interviews
SE 14
Review and
Revision of
IEPs
Partially
Implemented
Student
Records
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
The student record review and
interviews indicated that the
transition form was always
completed or updated annually.
Additionally, it is apparent on the
IEP that transition is being
discussed from age 14 or older.
Student records indicated that the
IEP Team does not always meet
annually on or before the
anniversary date of the IEP.
Interviews
If Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective Action
and Timelines for Implementation
The charter school must analyze the
root cause of the noncompliance and
develop the appropriate corrective
action which must include the
development of a new tracking
system to ensure the timely
completion of the review and
revision of IEPs by responsible
personnel.
The district must conduct a review
of student records for annual
reviews completed subsequent to the
district’s implementation of all
corrective action activities to
determine if the district is compliant
Prospect Hill Academy Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 6, 2011
Page 3 of 7
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
Please submit a
narrative
description of the
outcomes of the
root cause
analysis and the
corresponding
corrective actions
taken, including a
description of the
tracking system
and the person’s
responsible for
oversight. Please
provide a copy of
the agenda and
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
with the requirements of this
criterion.
Please note when conducting
internal monitoring that district
must maintain the following
documentation and make it
available to the Department upon
request: a) List of the student
names and grade level for the
records reviewed; b) Date of the
review; c) Name of person(s) who
conducted the review, their role(s),
and signature(s).
Prospect Hill Academy Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 6, 2011
Page 4 of 7
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
sign-in sheets for
any staff training
completed by
September 20,
2011.
Please submit the
results of an
administrative
review of a
sample of student
records for those
students requiring
annual reviews
post-training.
Indicate the
number of records
reviewed, the
name and role of
the reviewer, the
number found to
be compliant, the
root cause of any
continued
noncompliance,
and the additional
actions taken to
address areas of
concern by
December 5,
2011.
Criterion
Criterion
Implemented

Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
SE 18A
IEP
Development
and Content

Student
Records
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
If Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective Action
and Timelines for Implementation
The student record review and
interviews indicated that the IEP
Team develops IEPs that address
all elements.
Interviews
SE 19
Extended
Evaluations

Document
Review
Interviews
SE 21
School Day and
School Year
Requirements

Student
Records
While documentation indicated
that the charter school did not
have any extended evaluations in
the past two school years,
interviews indicated that staff and
the administration at the charter
school are clear on how to
appropriately use the extended
evaluation process.
The student record review and
interviews indicated that extended
school year programs are
indicated on the IEP.
Interviews
SE 24
Notice to
Parents
Regarding
Proposal or
Refusal to
Initiate or
Change the
Identification,
Evaluation or
Educational

Student
Records
Interviews
The student record review and
interviews indicated that when a
student is referred for evaluation,
the notice form (N1) that
accompanies the consent to
evaluate form describes what is
being proposed and addresses the
six guiding questions.
Prospect Hill Academy Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 6, 2011
Page 5 of 7
(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
Placement of
the Child or the
Provision of the
FAPE
SE 32
Parent advisory
council for
special
education

Document
Review
Interviews
SE 34
Continuum of
Alternative
Services

Document
Review
Interviews
SE 48
Equal
Opportunity to
Participate in
Educational,

Student
Records
Interviews
Documentation and interviews
indicated that the charter school’s
special education PAC has bylaws and there is a mechanism by
which the group can participate in
the planning, development and
evaluation of special education
programming.
Documentation and interviews
with staff indicated that the
charter school has a continuum of
alternative services and
placements. Documentation and
interviews determined that there
are currently no students requiring
sub-separate placements or
programming at the charter
school, however documentation
and interviews indicated that the
school would create a subseparate placement if such
programming was necessary.
The student record review and
interviews indicated that the
charter school does not remove
students from art, music and other
specials in order for those students
Prospect Hill Academy Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 6, 2011
Page 6 of 7
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
Criterion
Criterion
Implemented

Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Nonacademic,
Extracurricular
and Ancillary
Programs, as
well as
Participation in
Regular
Education
SE 56
Special
Education
Programs and
Services are
Evaluated
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
If Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective Action
and Timelines for Implementation
to receive their special education
services and they did not waive
any required classes.

Document
Review
Documentation demonstrated that
the special education programs
and services are regularly
evaluated.
Prospect Hill Academy Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 6, 2011
Page 7 of 7
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE REVIEW
School District: PROSPECT HILL ACADEMY CHARTER SCHOOL
M I D – CY C L E P R O G R E S S R E P O R T
Date Prepared: ____________________________________
Prepared by: __________________________________________________________________
(name and title)
Criterion: _______________________
Topic: ________________________________________________________________________
For each criterion for which you prepare a progress report, please



make a copy of this cover page,
fill in the information requested above, and
attach a complete description of the corrective action taken and any accompanying documentation.
(Description of corrective action for each criterion and any accompanying documentation should include all of the
“Progress Report Required Elements” for that criterion in the Mid-cycle Report.)
Send the whole set of completed progress reports to:
Darlene Lynch, Director
Program Quality Assurance Services
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
75 Pleasant Street
Malden, MA 02148-4906