Massachusetts Department of
Elementary and Secondary Education
350 Main Street, Malden, Massachusetts 02148-5023
Telephone: (781) 338-3700
TTY: N.E.T. Relay 1-800-439-2370
June 2, 2008
Richard W. Medeiros, Superintendent
Somerset Public Schools
580 Whetstone Hill Road
Somerset, MA 02726
Re: Mid-cycle Report
Dear Superintendent Medeiros:
Enclosed is the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education's Mid-cycle Report. This
report contains findings based on onsite monitoring the Department conducted to determine the
effectiveness of corrective action it approved or ordered to address noncompliance identified in
your district’s last Coordinated Program Review Report, dated August 15, 2005. 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.
While the Department of Elementary and Secondary 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, including but not limited to
noncompliance with special education criteria added or substantially changed in response to
IDEA 2004. Where the district has failed to implement its Coordinated Program Review
Corrective Action Plan, the Department views these findings to be serious. The Office of Special
Education Programs of the U.S. Department of Elementary and Secondary Education requires
that all special education noncompliance be corrected as soon as possible, but in no case later
than one year from the time of identification; where the district has failed to implement its CPR
Corrective Action Plan, this one-year period has long since passed.
In all instances where noncompliance has been found, the Department has prescribed corrective
action for the district that must be implemented without delay. (In the case of new findings of
noncompliance, this corrective action must be corrected 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 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 in the report.
You must submit your statement of assurance to me by June 30, 2008.
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 781-338-3739.
1
Sincerely,
John Coleman Swanson, Mid-cycle Review Chairperson
Program Quality Assurance Services
Darlene A. Lynch, Director
Program Quality Assurance Services
c:
Mitchell D. Chester, Ed.D., Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education
Ann Correira, School Committee Chairperson
Susan Doe, District Program Review Follow-up Coordinator
Encl.: Mid-cycle Report
2
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY
EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE REPORT
Somerset Public Schools
Date of Coordinated Program Review (CPR) Final Report: August 15, 2005
Date Coordinated Program Review Corrective Action Approved or Ordered: March 1, 2006
Dates of Corrective Action Plan Progress Reports: June 30, 2006, January 11, 2008
Dates of this Mid-cycle Review Onsite Visit: March 18, 2008, March 20, 2008 and March 26, 2008
Date of this Report: June 2, 2008
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS REPORT IS IN SEVERAL SECTIONS.
Special Education Criteria Cited in CPR Report and Monitored in Mid-cycle
Current CPR criteria available by scrolling down to the monitoring instruments at http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/default.html
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

SE 3
Special
requirements
for
determination
of specific
learning
disability

Documentation
Review, Student
Record Review,
and 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
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district’s
IEP Teams utilize the
specific learning disability
forms that are completed and
signed by the IEP Team
members.
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 1 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

SE 6
Determination
of transition
services

Documentation
Review, Student
Record Review,
and Staff
Interviews
SE 7
Transfer of
parental rights
at age of
majority and
student
participation
and consent at
the age of

Documentation
Review, Student
Record Review,
and 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
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district’s
IEP Teams are: (1)
completing the new
transition forms, (2)
consistently invite the
students to participate in the
IEP Team meetings to
discuss transition when the
students reach the age of 15,
and (3) consistently invite
outside agencies to
participate in IEP Team
meetings to discuss services
when the students graduate
or age-out of the special
education program.
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district has
developed an Age of
Majority notice form that is
distributed to students on
their 17th birthday. The Age
of Majority notice form
explains the variety of
options that a student may
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 2 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

majority
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
select upon reaching the age
of majority. Additionally,
the district has developed a
form that monuments the
students’ decision-making
selection upon reaching the
age of majority.
SE 8
IEP Team
composition
and attendance

Documentation
Review, Student
Record Review,
and Staff
Interviews
SE 9
Timeline for
Determination
of Eligibility

Documentation
Review, Student
Record Review,
and Staff
Interviews
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district’s
IEP Teams are composed of
all the requisite Team
members that are mandated
to be present at Team
meetings. There is evidence
of a high degree of parent
attendance at the IEP Team
meetings. The district also
utilizes an IEP Team
member excusal form when
appropriate.
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district
consistently meets the 45-day
timeline for the
determination of eligibility.
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 3 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

SE 13
Progress
Reports and
content

Documentation
Review, Student
Record Review,
and Staff
Interviews
SE 14
Review and
revision of IEPs

Documentation
Review, Student
Record Review,
and Staff
Interviews
SE 18A
IEP
development
and content

Documentation
Review, Student
Record Review,
and 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
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district’s
progress reports contained all
the required elements and
were given out to students
with the same frequency as
regular education students.
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district’s
IEP Teams consistently
conduct the annual reviews
within the specified one-year
timeline.
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district’s
IEP Teams are consistently
and appropriately completing
the Present Level of
Education Performance
(“PLEP”) A and B pages of
the students’ IEPs.
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 4 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

SE 20
Least restrictive
program
selected

Documentation
Review, Student
Record Review,
and Staff
Interviews
SE 21
School day and
school year
requirements

Documentation
Review, Student
Record Review,
and 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
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district’s
IEP Teams are consistently
documenting why removing
a student from the general
education classroom is
necessary in the
nonparticipation justification
statement section of the
student’s IEP.
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district’s
IEP Teams routinely
consider the need for
extended school year
services for every student.
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 5 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

SE 24
Notice to parent

Documentation
Review, Student
Record Review,
and Staff
Interviews
SE 26
Parent
participation in
meetings

Student Record
Review and Staff
Interviews
SE 34
Continuum of
alternative
services and

Documentation
Review, Student
Record Review,
and 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
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district’s
notice forms that accompany
the proposed IEPs for
students consistently address
all of the guiding questions
listed on the N1 forms.
Student records and staff
interviews indicate that the
district’s IEP Teams are
consistently documenting
their attempts to contact
parents if the parents are
unable to attend the IEP
Team meetings. The
district’s IEP Teams also
have developed alternative
methods for parent
participation (e.g.,
teleconferences or parent
input sheets).
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district has
developed a
continuum of services that
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 6 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

placements
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 available to meet the
needs of all students with
disabilities at all three
education levels.
SE 45
Procedures for
suspension up
to 10days and
after 10 days

Documentation
Review and Staff
Interviews
SE 47
Procedural
requirements
applied to
students not yet
determined to
be eligible for
special
education

Documentation
Review and Staff
Interviews
SE 49
Related services

Documentation
Review, Student
Record Review,
Documentation and staff
interviews indicate that the
district has updated the
student Codes of Conduct
and includes the required
procedural safeguards.
Documentation and staff
interviews indicate that the
district has updated the
student Codes of Conduct
and includes procedures that
are consistent with the
federal requirements of 20
U.S.C. c. 33 s. 1415(k)(8),
namely (k)(8)(B)(ii) on
knowledge and (C)(ii) on a
student’s placement pending
an evaluation.
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district does
consistently offer counseling
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 7 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

and Staff
Interviews
SE 55
Special
education
facilities and
classrooms

SE 56
Special
education
programs and
services are
evaluated
Partial
Documentation
Review, Staff
Interviews, and
Facilities
Review
Documentation
Review and 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
The district’s selfevaluation is not a formal
evaluation where the
results and
recommendations for
change are documented.
By September 30, 2008,
please provide a plan for the
district’s formal evaluation of
the special education
program(s) and services.
services to students who
need them.
Documentation, staff
interviews, and facilities
review indicate that the
district rectified the issues
cited in the Coordinated
Program Review at the
Chace Street Elementary
School, Wilbur Elementary
School, and at the Somerset
Middle School.
Documentation and staff
interviews indicate that the
district does conduct an
informal review of its special
education programs through
monthly administrative
counsel meetings.
Partial
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 8 of 18
By March 30, 2009, please
provide the results of any
program evaluation conducted
by the district, including
recommendations for change.
Special Education Criteria Created or Revised in Response to IDEA-2004
Current CPR criteria available by scrolling down to the monitoring instruments at http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/default.html
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
SE 3
Special
requirements
for
determination
of specific
learning
disability

Documentation
Review,
Student Record
Review, and
Staff Interviews
SE 6 ##1 - 3
Determination
of Transition
Services

Documentation
Review,
Student Record
Review, and
Staff Interviews
SE 8
IEP Team
composition
and attendance

Documentation
Review,
Student Record
Review, and
Staff Interviews
SE 12

Documentation
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
See comments to SE 3 in the
previous section.
See comments to SE 6 in the
previous section.
See comments to SE 8 in the
previous section.
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 9 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Frequency of
re-evaluation
Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Review,
Student Record
Review, and
Staff Interviews
indicate that the district’s
IEP Teams consistently
develop re-evaluations
within the specified threeyear timeline.
SE 13
Progress
Reports and
content

Documentation
Review,
Student Record
Review, and
Staff Interviews
SE 14
Review and
revision of IEPs

Documentation
Review,
Student Record
Review, and
Staff Interviews
SE 25B
Resolution of
disputes

Documentation
Review,
Student Record
Review, and
Staff Interviews
SE 33

Documentation
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
See comments to SE 13 in the
previous section.
See comments to SE 14 in the
previous section.
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district
consistently utilizes the
dispute resolution procedures
and that administrative staff
members are aware of these
regulations.
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 10 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Involvement in
the General
Curriculum
SE 39A
Procedures for
services to
eligible private
school students
whose parents
reside in the
district
(SE 39A does not
apply to charter
schools or
vocational
schools)

Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Review,
Student Record
Review, and
Staff Interviews
indicate that the district’s
IEP Teams consistently
discuss the students’
involvement and progress in
the general curriculum and it
is noted on each IEP.
Documentation
Review,
Student Record
Review, and
Staff Interviews
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that
students in private schools
whose parents reside indistrict are given evaluations
and, if found eligible, they
may access a full range of
special education and related
services. The district has
documented the
proportionate share on the
Department’s mandated
form.
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 11 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
SE 39B
Procedures for
services to
eligible students
in private
schools in the
district whose
parents reside
out of state

Documentation
Review,
Student Record
Review, and
Staff Interviews
SE 46
Procedures for
suspension of
students with
disabilities
more than 10
days

Documentation
Review,
Student Record
Review, and
Staff Interviews
SE 52
Appropriate
certifications/
licenses or
other
credentials –
related service

Documentation
Review and
Staff Interviews
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that
students in private schools
whose parents reside out of
state have the opportunity to
access special education
services.
(SE 39B does
not apply to
charter schools
or vocational
schools)
Documentation, student
records, and staff interviews
indicate that the district’s
Codes of Conduct contain all
the required elements for the
discipline of special
education students.
Documentation and staff
interviews indicate the
district has the appropriate
certification/licenses for all
of the related service
providers.
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 12 of 18
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
providers
(to be reviewed
only with
respect to
providers of
interpreting
services)
Criteria from Other Regulated Programs Monitored During this Mid-cycle Review
Current CPR criteria available by scrolling down to the monitoring instruments at http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/default.html
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s) of
Verification
CR 6
Availability of
in-school
programs for
pregnant
students

Documentation
Review and
Staff Interviews
CR 7
Information to
be translated

Documentation
Review and
Staff 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
Documentation and staff
interviews indicate that the
district has a pregnancy
policy for students that is
consistent with state and
federal regulations.
Documentation and staff
interviews indicate that the
district has developed a
system for translating
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 13 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s) of
Verification
into languages
other than
English
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
documents into languages
other than English. For
example, the district has the
capacity to translate
documents in Portuguese,
Spanish, and French. Should
there be a need to translate a
document into a lowincidence language, the
district utilizes the translation
services of Rapport
International and Catholic
Charities.
CR 10A
Student
handbooks and
codes of
conduct

Documentation
Review and
Staff Interviews
CR 11A
Designation of
coordinator(s);

Documentation
Review and
Staff Interviews
Documentation and staff
interviews indicate that the
district’s handbooks and
codes of conduct now
contain all information
regarding discipline
procedures for students in
special education and on 504
plans.
Documentation and staff
interviews indicate that the
district distributed the
Statement of Civil Rights
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 14 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s) of
Verification
grievance
procedures
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
Policy and Grievance
Procedures to parents and
students at the beginning of
the 2007/2008 school year.
CR 12A
Annual and
continuous
notification
concerning
nondiscriminati
on and
coordinators

Documentation
Review and
Staff Interviews
CR 14
Counseling and
counseling
materials free
from bias and
stereotypes

Documentation
Review and
Staff Interviews
Documentation and staff
interviews indicate that the
district distributed the NonDiscrimination Statement
and Notification of the 504
and Title IX Compliance
Officers (along with their
contact information) to
parents and students at the
beginning of the 2007/2008
school year.
Documentation and staff
interviews indicate that the
district developed an
instrument to evaluate
counseling materials to check
for bias and stereotypes. To
communicate effectively
with limited English
Proficient parents and
students, the district utilizes
school staff as interpreters
and translators in the
languages of Portuguese and
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 15 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
Criterion
Number/Topic
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
Spanish. The district will
utilize the Rapport
International and Catholic
Charities should the need
arise to translate documents
into low-incidence
languages.
CR 15
Nondiscriminatory
administration
of scholarships,
prizes and
awards

Documentation
Review and
Staff Interviews
CR 18A
School district
employment
practices

Documentation
Review and
Staff Interviews
CR 21
Staff training
regarding civil

Documentation
Review and
Staff Interviews
Documentation and staff
interviews indicate that the
district’s scholarships, prizes
and awards sponsored or
administered by the district
are free of restrictions based
upon race, color, sex,
religion, national origin,
sexual orientation, or
disability.
Documentation and staff
interviews indicate that the
district’s Equal Employment
statements in its personnel
policies contain all the
protected classes of people.
Documentation and staff
interviews indicate that the
district conducts staff
training regarding civil rights
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 16 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s) of
Verification
rights
responsibilities
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
responsibilities on an annual
basis. Specifically, the
district distributes civil rights
documents and policies to
the staff members and the
principals review the
materials with the staff at the
building-level.
CR 22
Accessibility of
district
programs and
services for
students with
disabilities

Documentation
Review and
Staff Interviews
CR 23
Comparability
of facilities

Documentation
Review and
Staff Interviews
CR 25
Institutional
self-evaluation

Documentation
Review and
Staff Interviews
Documentation, staff
interviews, and facilities
review indicate that the
district rectified the issues
cited in the Coordinated
Program Review at the
Chace Street Elementary
School, Wilbur Elementary
School, and at the Somerset
Middle School.
See comments to SE 55.
Documentation and staff
interviews indicate that the
district annually evaluates all
aspects of its K-12 program
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 17 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
Criterion
Number/Topic
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
to ensure that all students
have equal access to all
programs, including athletics
and other extracurricular
activities.
Somerset Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
June 2, 2008
Page 18 of 18
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements