Massachusetts Department of
Elementary and Secondary Education
75 Pleasant Street, Malden, Massachusetts 02148-4906
Telephone: (781) 338-3700
TTY: N.E.T. Relay 1-800-439-2370
December 29, 2011
Jill Crafts, Charter School Leader
Rising Tide Charter School
6 Resnick Road
Plymouth, MA 02360-4873
Re: Mid-cycle Report
Dear Ms. Crafts:
Enclosed is the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s Mid-cycle Report based on the onsite
visit conducted in your district in November 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 Nancy Hicks at 781-338-3714.
Sincerely,
Nancy Hicks, 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
Vani Rastogi-Kelly, Supervisor, Program Quality Assurance Services
Matthew Quinn, Charter School Board of Directors Chairperson
Erin Preston, Local Program Review Coordinator
Enc:
Mid-cycle Report
1
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE REPORT
Rising Tide Charter School
Date of the Mid-cycle Review Onsite: November 16, 2011
Date of this Report: December 29, 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
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Investigation
Not
Applicable
SE 7
Transfer of
parental
rights and
student
participation
and consent
at age of
majority

SE 8
IEP Team
composition
and
attendance
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
If Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and
Timelines for Implementation
Rising Tide Charter School serves
students in grades five through nine
only.
Student
Records
Interviews
All required Team members are
present at IEP Team meetings.
Members of the Team attend Team
meetings unless:
 The charter school and
parent agree, in writing,
that the attendance of the
Rising Tide Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
December 29, 2011
Page 1 of 6
(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


SE 18A
IEP
development
and content
Student
Records
Interviews
If Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and
Timelines for Implementation
Team member is not
necessary because the
member’s area of the
curriculum or related
services is not being
modified or discussed; or
The charter school and
parent agree, in writing, to
excuse a required Team
member’s participation and
the excused member
provides written input into
the development of the IEP
to the parent and IEP Team
prior to the meeting.
IEP Teams consider and
specifically address the skills and
proficiencies needed to avoid and
respond to bullying, harassment, or
teasing when a student is identified
with a disability that affects social
skills development, when the
disability makes him or her
vulnerable to bullying, harassment,
or teasing, or when the student is
identified with a disability on the
autism spectrum.
Rising Tide Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
December 29, 2011
Page 2 of 6
(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
Student
Records
The district obtains written parental
consent prior to conducting an
initial evaluation or reevaluation.
Interviews
SE 25
Parental
consent
If Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective
Action and
Timelines for Implementation
When a parent revokes consent, in
writing, to special education
services, the charter school
provides written notice to the
parent of the charter school’s
proposal to discontinue services
based on the revocation of consent,
as well as information on how the
parent can obtain a copy of his/her
right to procedural safeguards. The
charter school provides notice
within a reasonable time before it
intends to discontinue services.
Charter school staff were aware
that they may not use mediation or
request a due process hearing to
obtain agreement or a ruling for
continuation of services.
Rising Tide Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
December 29, 2011
Page 3 of 6
(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

Criterion
Partially
Implemented
(PI) or Not
Implemented
(NI)
Method(s) of
Investigation
Basis of Determination about
Criterion
When students are removed
from the general education
classroom, the Team completes
the required IEP nonparticipation justification
statement explaining why
removal was considered critical
to the student’s program and the
basis for its conclusion that
education of the student in a less
restrictive environment, with the
use of supplementary aids and
services, could not be achieved
satisfactorily.
Notices of Proposed School
District Action (N1) contain
sufficient detail and respond to
all questions on page 2 of the N1
form, including:
 A description of the
action proposed or
refused by the charter
school.
SE 20
Least
restrictive
program
selected

Student
Records
SE 24
Notice to
parent
regarding
proposal or
refusal to
initiate or
change the
identification,

Student
Records
Interviews
If Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective Action and
Timelines for Implementation
Rising Tide Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
December 29, 2011
Page 4 of 6
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements
Criterion
evaluation, or
educational
placement of
the student
or the
provision of
FAPE
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
An explanation of why
the charter school
proposed or refused to
take the action.
A description of any
other options the charter
school considered and
the reasons why those
options were rejected
A description of each
evaluation procedure,
test, record, or report the
charter school used as a
basis for the proposed or
refused action.
A description of any
other factors that were
relevant to the charter
school’s proposal or
refusal.
The charter school does not limit
a parent’s right to refer a student
for a timely special education
evaluation because it has not
explored or attempted
interventions prescribed by the
Rising Tide Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
December 29, 2011
Page 5 of 6
(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
child study team.
SE 32
Parent
advisory
council for
special
education

Interviews
Document
Review
The special education parent
advisory council (SEPAC)
members participate in the
evaluation of the charter
school’s special education
programs through the use of a
parent survey that was
distributed to the SEPAC, the
results of which were discussed
with the charter school. The
SEPAC also participates in the
evaluation of special education
programs through open
discussions with a representative
of the special education
department who is present at
SEPAC meetings.
Rising Tide Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
December 29, 2011
Page 6 of 6
(b) Progress
Report Due
Date(s) and
Required
Elements