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
June 26, 2007
Joshua Phillips
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School
120 Fischer Avenue
Roxbury, MA 02120
Re: Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report
Dear Mr. Phillips:
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 Roxbury Preparatory Charter School
Coordinated Program Review Report issued on September 10, 2003. 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/ .
While the Department of Education found your district to have resolved certain noncompliance
issues, others were partially corrected or not addressed at all, or the Department’s onsite team
identified new issues of noncompliance, either noncompliance with special education criteria
added or substantially changed in response to IDEA 2004, noncompliance with ELE criteria, or
other new noncompliance. Where the district has failed to implement its approved Corrective
Action Plan, the Department views these findings to be serious.
1
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 July 13, 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 781-338-3792.
Sincerely,
Stacey Klasnick, Mid-cycle Review Chairperson
Program Quality Assurance Services
Darlene A. Lynch, Director
Program Quality Assurance Services
c:
David P. Driscoll, Commissioner of Education
William Cowan, Board of Trustees, Chairperson
Dana Lehman, District Program Review Follow-up Coordinator
Encl.: Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report
2
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School
ONSITE MONITORING OF IMPLEMENTATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION AND OF CERTAIN NEW REQUIREMENTS
Date of Coordinated Program Review (CPR): March 31-April 3, 2003
Date of Coordinated Program Review Corrective Action Plan Approval: December 9, 2003
Dates of Corrective Action Plan Progress Reports: June 22, 2004, October 15, 2004, February 15, 2005 and October 31, 2005
Dates of this Mid-cycle Review Onsite Visit: May 21, 2007
Date of this Report: June 26, 2007
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS REPORT IS IN SEVERAL SECTIONS.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 1 of 28
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text of
2006-2007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination
that Corrective Action
was Implemented and
has been Effective
The student record
review and document
review demonstrated that
assessments are
appropriately selected
and interpreted for
evaluation.
The student record
review demonstrated that
appropriately
credentialed and trained
specialists complete all
required and optional
assessments.
The student record
review demonstrated that
assessment summaries

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
Special Ed. Criteria
Cited in CPR
Report and
Monitored in Midcycle
MOA 4
Dispropor-tionality
(if Cited in the CPR
Report)
SE 1
Assessments
Implemented
Student
record
review and
document
review
SE 2
Required and
optional
assessments
Implemented
Student
record
review
SE 4
Reports of
Assessment results
Implemented
Student
record
review
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 2 of 28
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text of
2006-2007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination
that Corrective Action
was Implemented and
has been Effective

SE 9
Timeline for
determination of
eligibility
Implemented
Student
record
review
SE 10
End of school year
evaluations
Implemented
Student
record
review
SE 11
Independent
Evaluations
Implemented
Student
record
review
SE 15
Outreach by the
Implemented
Document
review
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
are completed prior to
discussion with the
Team and are made
available to the parents
at least two days prior to
the Team meting.
The charter school is
meeting all timeline
requirements for
determination of
eligibility and the
provision of
documentation to
parents.
The charter school
completes end of year
requests for evaluations
within the required
timelines.
The charter school
responds to all parental
requests for independent
evaluations as required
by state and federal
regulation.
The charter school
conducts annual
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 3 of 28
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text of
2006-2007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification

school district
SE 18A
IEP development
and content
Basis of Determination
that Corrective Action
was Implemented and
has been Effective
Partial
Student
record
review and
document
review
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
Partial
The charter school does
not create vision
statements for students
fifteen and older that
reflect the student’s
interests and
preferences.
The charter school must
provide evidence of staff
training of IEP development
and content in the areas of
vision statements for
students fifteen and older
and accommodations listed
under State and school-wide
Assessments to be consistent
with the accommodations
listed on PLEP A and PLEP
B of the IEP.
outreach to a variety of
community agencies and
their school.
The charter school
develops IEPs to include
specifically designed
instruction, measurable
annual goals and is
written in generally
understandable
language.
The student record
review demonstrated
that accommodations
listed under state and
school-wide
assessments aren’t
consistent with the
accommodations listed
on PLEP A and PLEP
B of the IEP.
Please include the agenda,
signed attendance sheet, and
any training materials to the
Department by October 5,
2007.
The charter school will
conduct an internal
monitoring of IEPs for
students fifteen years and
older for at least a 3 month
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 4 of 28
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text of
2006-2007 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

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
period post-training to
ensure that vision statements
are including student
preferences and interests.
The monitoring will indicate
the # of student records
reviewed, the results of the
review, the person
responsible for the review,
and any additional steps
taken if non-compliance is
found.
The charter school will
conduct another internal
monitoring of a new
sampling of IEPs
instructional
accommodations to ensure
that they are consistent with
the. MCAS
accommodations. The
monitoring will indicate the
# of student records
reviewed, the results of the
review, the person
responsible for the review,
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 5 of 28
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text of
2006-2007 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

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
and any additional steps
taken if non-compliance is
found.
Please provide the
documentation to the
Department by January 14,
2008.
SE 18B
Provision of IEP
Partial
Student
record
review and
staff
interviews
The staff interviews
indicated that the charter
school provides the
parent(s) with a copy of
the service delivery grid
at the conclusion of the
IEP meeting.
Partial
The charter school is
providing the service
delivery grid, however,
the charter school does
not provide a written
statement of the
agreements reached at
the conclusion of the
IEP meeting.
*Please note that the
Department has
recently changed the
implementation
requirements for
providing an IEP
“immediately”
following its
development in a Team
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 6 of 28
The charter school must
provide evidence of staff
training on the requirements
pertaining to the
“immediate” provision of
the IEP to the parent.
Please include the agenda,
signed attendance sheet, and
any training materials to the
Department by October 5,
2007.
The charter school will
provide documentation
provided to a parent at the
conclusion of an IEP
meeting from a sample of
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text of
2006-2007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination
that Corrective Action
was Implemented and
has been Effective

SE 19
Extended
Evaluations
Implemented
Student
records
SE 20
Least restrictive
program provided
Yes
Student
record
review,
document
review, and
staff
interviews
SE 21
School day and
school year
No
Student
record
review
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
meeting. Refer to the
Department’s Special
Education website at
http://www.doe.mass.ed
u/news/news.asp?id=31
82
three IEP meetings held
post-training. Please
provide the documentation
to the Department by
October 5, 2007.
The charter school does
not indicate on IEPs
whether disabled
students require
The charter school must
conduct training for staff on
annually determining the
need for “Extended School
The charter school
conducts extended
evaluations, as required
and extended evaluations
are not used to deny a
program or services
determined necessary by
the Team.
The charter school
actively seeks to provide
educational services in
the least restrictive
setting for disabled
students.
Please see the
Department’s comments
to the right.
Corrective
Action Not
Effective
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 7 of 28
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text of
2006-2007 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

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
extended year services.
General education
summer programs
offered to all students
enrolled in the school
might not address the
very specific needs
identified by the IEP
Team and documented
in the student’s IEP that
require specialized
instruction, related
services and other
components of special
education.
Year” services for all
students.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 8 of 28
Please include the agenda,
signed attendance sheet, and
any training materials to the
Department by October 5,
2007.
The charter school will
conduct an internal
monitoring of IEPs or IEP
Amendments documenting
the need for extended school
year services for a 3- month
period post-training to
ensure that extended school
year services are considered.
The monitoring will indicate
the # of student records
reviewed, the results of the
review, the person
responsible for the review,
and any additional steps
taken if non-compliance is
found.
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text of
2006-2007 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

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
Please provide the
documentation to the
Department by January 14,
2008.
SE 24
FAPE
Partial
Student
record
review
The student record
review demonstrated that
the charter school
provides N-1 notices to
parents.
Partial

The N-1 forms
do not
completely
address the six
required
questions of the
N1 form.
The charter school must
conduct training for the
special education staff
regarding writing N-1
notices that include
addressing the six key
questions. Please provide an
agenda, signed attendance
sheet, and training materials
to the Department by
October 5, 2007.
The charter school will
conduct an internal
monitoring of N-1 forms for
at least a 3 month period
post-training to ensure that
they address answering the
six key questions. The
monitoring will indicate the
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 9 of 28
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text of
2006-2007 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

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
# of student records
reviewed, the results of the
review, the person
responsible for the review,
and any additional steps
taken if non-compliance is
found.
Please provide the
documentation to the
Department by January 14,
2008.
SE 27
Notice to Parents
Partial
Student
record
review
The student record
review indicated that the
charter school is
providing meeting
invitations to parents.
New Issue
The Team meeting
invitations are not
accurately reflecting the
meeting type and
purpose.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 10 of 28
The charter school must
conduct training for the
special education staff
regarding writing Team
meeting invitations that
include stating the specific
meeting type and purpose.
Please include an agenda,
signed attendance sheet, and
training materials to the
Department by October 5,
2007.
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text of
2006-2007 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

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
The charter school will
conduct an internal
monitoring of Team
Meeting Invitations for at
least a 3-month period posttraining to ensure that they
demonstrate the specific
meeting type and purpose.
The monitoring will indicate
the # of student records
reviewed, the results of the
review, the person
responsible for the review,
and any additional steps
taken if non-compliance is
found.
Please provide the
documentation to the
Department by January 14,
2008.
SE 29
Communications
are in English and
primary language
of home
Implemented
Student
record
review
The student record
review indicated that the
charter school routinely
translates IEPs,
evaluations, and meeting
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 11 of 28
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text of
2006-2007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination
that Corrective Action
was Implemented and
has been Effective

Student
record
review,
document
review, and
staff
interview
Student
record
review and
staff
interview
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
notices in the parent’s
primary language.
The document review
indicated that the charter
school offers services to
students with disabilities
consistent with the
identified needs of the
students.
The student record
review and staff
interviews indicated that
specialized materials and
equipment are specified
in the students’ IEPs.
SE 34
Continuum of
services
Implemented
SE 35
Assistive
Technology
Implemented
SE 43
Behavioral
Interventions
Implemented
Student
record
review
The charter school’s IEP
Teams consider student
behavioral needs and
conduct Functional
Behavioral Assessments
when required.
SE 50
Administrator of
Special Education
Implemented
Document
review
The document review
indicated that the charter
school has appointed an
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 12 of 28
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text of
2006-2007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination
that Corrective Action
was Implemented and
has been Effective

SE 54
Professional
Development
Implemented
Document
review
SE 53
Use of
paraprofessionals
Partial
Staff
interviews
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
Individual Needs
Coordinator who is
responsible for ensuring
compliance with all
federal and state special
education laws.
The document review
indicated that the charter
school provided training
to all special education
staff on state and federal
requirements regarding
identification,
evaluation, and
placement of students
with disabilities.
The charter school has
employed one
paraprofessional.
New Issue
The staff interviews
indicated that the
paraprofessional is
designing instruction
for students with
disabilities.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 13 of 28
The charter school must
provide a signed assurance
statement from the Special
Education Director of the
charter school stating that
paraprofessionals will not be
used to design instruction.
The charter school Special
Education Director will
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text of
2006-2007 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

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
review with the teaching
staff their responsibility to
design the instruction that
the paraprofessional staff
will deliver.
Please provide the written
assurance and staff
notification to the
Department by October 5,
2007.
SE 56
Program
Evaluation
Implemented
Document
review
The document review
indicated that the CoDirectors, the Special
Education Director, and
the Learning Specialist
annually evaluate the
special education
program.
The program evaluation
includes an analysis of
the following areas:
 Review of the
end-of-the-year
self-audit;
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 14 of 28
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text of
2006-2007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination
that Corrective Action
was Implemented and
has been Effective







SE 57
Special education
Child Count
Implemented
Document
review
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
Review of staff
evaluations;
Review of family
evaluation form;
Review of
student
performance;
Review of the
Child Study
Process;
Review of the
Continuum of
Services; and
Review of
Professional
Development.
The document review
indicated that the charter
school maintains
appropriate procedures
to ensure that an
accurate and
unduplicated child count
is provided.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 15 of 28
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Partial
Student
record, and
document
review
The charter school provided
a policy regarding their
transition services.
Partial
The student record
review indicated that
the school is not using
the mandated transition
planning charts.
The charter school will
provide a revised copy of
the school’s policy in
regards to transition services
to include the statement,
“The discussion should
begin no later than age
fifteen regardless of grade
level.” The charter school
must also provide evidence
of staff receiving training
consistent with regulatory
requirements for transition
services.
Special
Education
Criteria
created or
revised in
response to
IDEA-2004
SE 6 ##1 - 3
Determination
of Transition
Services
*Pleases note that
recently enacted IDEA2004 regulations have
changed the
requirements for
transition planning.
The transition-planning
chart will become a
mandated form, which
should be maintained
with the IEP, Refer to
Administrative
Advisory SPED 2007-1
for guidance at
http://www.doe.mass.ed
ue/sped/advisories/01_1
.html or the
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 16 of 28
Please include the agenda,
signed attendance sheet, and
any training materials by
October 5, 2007.
Department’s guidance
on transitioning
planning at
http://www.doe.mass.ed
u/sped/links/tranisiton.h
tml.
The charter school will
conduct an internal
monitoring of student
transition planning charts for
at least a 3- month period
post-training to ensure that
the appropriate chart is
being implemented. The
monitoring will indicate the
# of student records
reviewed, the results of the
review, the person
responsible for the review,
and any additional steps
taken if non-compliance is
found.
Please provide the
documentation to the
Department by January 14,
2008.
SE 8
IEP Team
composition
and
attendance
Partial
Student
record
review,
document
review, and
staff
interviews
The charter school’s Special
Education Director
determines appropriate
people to attend each Team
meeting and ensures that
attendance sheets are signed
to verify attendance by the
required Team participants.
Partial
The charter school’s
local process does not
include excusing Team
members from IEP
meetings when they are
unable to attend.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 17 of 28
The charter school must
create a process by which
parents may excuse Team
members from a meeting
and document the parent’s
consent.
The charter school must
conduct training to all staff
regarding the process of
excusing Team members
from IEP meetings. Please
include an agenda, signed
attendance sheet, and
training materials.
Please provide the
documentation to the
Department by October 5,
2007.
SE 12
Frequency of
re-evaluation
Implemented
SE 13
Progress
Reports and
content
Partial
Student
record
review
The student record review
demonstrated that the
charter school re-evaluates
students every three years as
required.
Student
record
review,
document
review, and
staff
interviews
The document review
indicated that the charter
school’s procedures for
progress reports stipulate
that when effective progress
is not being made by the
student, four courses of
action can be taken:
1. The special
education staff works
with teachers to
complete Child
Study forms;
2. The special
education staff works
with the child’s
parents/guardians to
complete Child
Study Forms
3. The special
Partial
While the school’s
procedures indicate a
Team meeting will be
held for students with
progress reports
indicating the student is
not making effective
progress, the student
record review and staff
interviews indicated
that the charter school
does not reconvene the
IEP Team when the
progress report reflects
lack of student
progress.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 18 of 28
The charter school must
conduct training to all staff
regarding the school’s
procedure for reconvening
an IEP Team when the
progress report reflects a
lack of student success and
ensuring that documentation
is kept in the student record.
Please include an agenda,
signed attendance sheet, and
training materials.
Please provide the
documentation to the
Department by October 5,
2007.
*Please note that recently
enacted IDEA-2004
education staff
compiles additional
assessment
information such as
trimester grades,
tutoring reports,
standardized test
scores; and
4. A Team meeting will
be held.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 19 of 28
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/sp
ed/iep/eng_toc.html.
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

SE 14
Review and
revision of
IEPs
Partial
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Student
record
review
The student record review
demonstrated that IEP Teams
meet annually, on or before
the anniversary date of the
implementation of the IEP to
consider the student’s
progress and to review,
revise, or develop a new IEP
or refer the student for a reevaluation, as appropriate.
Criterion
Determined
to be
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Partial
The staff interviews
indicated that the
charter school is failing
to issue a new IEP or
generate an IEP
Amendment when
changing or adding
services within the IEP
period.
The charter school must
conduct training to all staff
regarding writing an IEP
Amendment when
discussing changes or
adding services to an
existing IEP. Please include
an agenda, signed
attendance sheet, and
training materials by
October 5, 2007.
The charter school will
conduct an internal
monitoring of IEP
Amendments for a 3- month
period post-training to
ensure the appropriate use of
an Amendment.. The
monitoring will indicate the
# of student records
reviewed, the results of the
review, the person
responsible for the review,
and any additional steps
taken if non-compliance is
found.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 20 of 28
Please provide the
documentation to the
Department by January 14,
2008.
SE 25B
Resolution of
disputes
Implemented
Document
review
The charter school has not
had any dispute resolution
sessions, however, the
document review indicated
that the charter school’s
policies contain all the
required elements.
SE 33
Involvement
in the
General
Curriculum
Implemented
Student
record
review and
staff
interviews
The student record review
and staff interviews indicated
that all students with
disabilities participate in the
general education curriculum.
SE 39A
Procedures
for services to
eligible
private school
students
whose
parents
reside in the
district
Not
Applicable
This criterion does not apply
to charter schools.
(SE 39A does
not apply to
charter schools
or vocational
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 21 of 28
schools)
SE 39B
Procedures
for services to
eligible
students in
private
schools in the
district whose
parents
reside out of
state
Not
Applicable
This criterion does not apply
to charter schools.
(SE 39B does
not apply to
charter schools
or vocational
schools)
SE 46
Procedures
for
suspension of
students with
disabilities
more than 10
days
Implemented
Student
record
review,
document
review, and
staff
interviews
The charter school has
procedures consistent with
federal requirements for the
suspension of students with
disabilities when such
removals exceed ten days.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 22 of 28
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s)
of
Verification
Implemented
Document
review
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
Civil Rights
(MOA) and
Other General
Education
Requirements
MOA 1
Identification
of limited
English
Proficient
students
The charter school identifies
Limited English Proficient
(LEP) students by using the
following assessments:
 LAS R/W
 LAS Oral
The LAS R/W and LAS oral
are available in age spans
from preschool to high
school.
The charter school has hired
an ELE administrator who is
qualified to administer the
assessments.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 23 of 28
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School
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
ELE 1
Annual
Assessment
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

Implemented
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
No corrective action is required.
ELE 2
MCAS
Participation
Implemented
No corrective action is required.
ELE 3
Initial
Identification
Implemented
No corrective action is required.
ELE 4
Waiver
Procedures
Implemented
No corrective action is required.
ELE 5
Program
Placement
Implemented
No corrective action is required.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 24 of 28
ELE Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

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
The charter school’s policy states that LEP students may be redesignated as FLEP students when:
 He/She is deemed English proficient using the LAS R/W and
MELA-O; and
 He/She is able to participate in the general educational
program without the use of adapted or simplified English
materials; and
 He/She performs at “proficient” levels on state-mandated
assessments.
The charter school must conduct training to all
staff regarding the implementation of the charter
school’s policy for re-designating LEP students.
Please include an agenda, signed attendance sheet,
and training materials.
and
Structure
ELE 6
Program
Exit
and
Readiness
Partially
Implemented
Please provide the documentation to the
Department by October 5, 2007.
An interview with the ELE Administrator indicated that the charter
school does not implement its own policy but rather re-designates
LEP students on a case-by- case basis using some of the criteria
stipulated in the policy and at other times not adhering to the policy.
ELE 7
Parent
Involvement
Implemented
No corrective action is required.
ELE 8
Declining
Entry to a
Program
Implemented
No corrective action is required.
ELE 9
Instructional
Grouping
Implemented
No corrective action is required.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 25 of 28
ELE Criterion
Number
and
Topic
ELE 10
Parental
Notification
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

Partially
Implemented
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
The charter school notifies parents in their primary/home language, as
well as in English, regarding the ELE program their child is enrolled
in. The letter does not contain the charter school’s specific exit
requirements nor does it clearly identify the parents’ right to apply for
a waiver.
Please provide the Department with the charter
school’s revised notice to parents to include the
charter school’s specific exit requirements and the
parents’ right to apply for a waiver.
ELE 11
Equal Access
to Academic
Programs and
Services
Implemented
Please provide the documentation to the
Department by October 5, 2007.
No corrective action is required.
ELE 12
Equal Access
to
Nonacademic
and Extracurricular
Programs
Implemented
No corrective action is required.
ELE 13
Follow-up
Support
Partially
Implemented
ELE 14
Licensure
Requirements
Implemented
The student record review indicated that there is no formal
monitoring of students who have exited an English learner education
program, however, the staff interview indicated that students are
monitored informally.
Please provide the Department with a description
of the charter school’s formal monitoring system
for students who have exited an English learner
education program by October 5, 2007.
No corrective action is required.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 26 of 28
ELE Criterion
Number
and
Topic
ELE 15
Professional
Development
Requirements
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

Implemented
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
No corrective action is required
ELE 16
Equitable
Facilities
Implemented
No corrective action is required.
ELE 17
Program
Evaluation
Implemented
No corrective action is required.
ELE 18
Records of
LEP Students(To be
reviewed
during next
CPR visit.)
Partially
Implemented
The student records were missing ELE progress reports and evidence
of follow up monitoring.
The charter school will devise a checklist of items
for ensuring the completeness of ELE records and
distribute to appropriate staff.
The charter school will conduct an internal
monitoring for record completeness and
indicate the # of student records reviewed, the
results of the review, the person responsible
for the review, and any additional steps taken
if non-compliance is found.
Please provide the documentation to the
Department by October 5, 2007.
Roxbury Preparatory Charter School Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 26, 2007
Page 27 of 28