COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
MID-CYCLE REPORT
Charter School or District: West Bridgewater
MCR Onsite Dates: 03/21/2012
Program Area: Special Education
Mitchell D. Chester, Ed.D.
Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education
COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW
MID-CYCLE REPORT
SE Criterion # 7 - Transfer of parental rights at age of majority and
student participation and consent at the age of majority
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
A review of student records and interviews with staff members indicated that the
district consistently notifies students and parents of the transfer of rights one
year prior to the student reaching the age of majority. Notices explicitly state that
all rights accorded to parents under special education law will transfer to the 18
year old. Upon reaching 18, the district procures consent from students to
continue their special education program.
SE Criterion # 8 - IEP Team composition and attendance
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
A review of student records and interviews with staff members demonstrated
that the district consistently has all required IEP Team members in attendance or
written excusals documenting that the parent agreed that attendance of the
absent IEP Team member was not necessary. In instances when a required Team
member is absent, the records showed that they consistently provide written
input for the development of the IEP.
SE Criterion # 9 - Timeline for determination of eligibility and provision
of documentation to parent
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
A review of student records showed that the district is completing evaluations
within 30 school working days of receipt of the parent's written consent to a
proposed initial evaluation or re-evaluation.
SE Criterion # 14 - Review and revision of IEPs
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
A review of student records indicated that the district consistently convenes a
Team meeting on or before the anniversary date of the IEP to review the
student's progress and to review, revise or develop a new IEP. The student
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
West Bridgewater Mid-Cycle Report - 06/04/2012
Page 2 of 8
SE Criterion # 14 - Review and revision of IEPs
record review and interviews also indicated that the district does not use IEP
amendments to extend the dates of an IEP beyond one year.
SE Criterion # 18A - IEP development and content
Rating:
Partially Implemented
Basis for Findings:
A review of student records indicated that the IEP Team does not consistently
consider and specifically address in the IEP 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.
Department Order of Corrective Action:
For those students whose records were identified by the Department, please
reconvene the Team to consider and address the skills and proficiencies needed
to avoid and respond to bullying, harassment, or teasing.
The district must provide training for Team chairs to address the skills and
proficiencies to respond to bullying, harassment or teasing for students on the
autism spectrum, students with disabilities that need social skills development or
other vulnerable students. Please see www.doe.mass.edu/sped/
advisories/11_2ta.html.
Further, the district must develop an internal oversight and tracking system to
ensure that for students on the autism spectrum or those that with a disability
that make them vulnerable to bullying, harassment or teasing, that the IEP
contains information regarding skills and proficiencies to address bullying,
harassment and teasing.
The district must conduct an analysis of student records of students whose IEPs
were developed as a result of Team meetings held after implementation of all
corrective actions.
*Please note when conducting administrative monitoring the district must
maintain the following documentation and make it available to the Department
upon request: a) List of student names and grade levels for the records reviewed;
b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the review, with their
role(s) and signature(s).
Required Elements of Progress Reports:
For student records identified by the Department, submit evidence that the Team
has reconvened to consider and address the skills and proficiencies needed to
avoid and respond to bullying, harassment, or teasing by October 5, 2012.
Submit evidence of training related to addressing bullying and harassment which
will include but not be limited to a training agenda, attendance sheet (including
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
West Bridgewater Mid-Cycle Report - 06/04/2012
Page 3 of 8
SE Criterion # 18A - IEP development and content
name and role) and copies of the materials presented. Also, please submit the
description of the internal oversight and tracking system and identify the
person(s) responsible for the oversight, including the date for the system's
implementation by October 5, 2012.
Provide the results of the administrative review of student records of students
whose IEPs were developed as a result of Team meetings held after
implementation of all corrective actions. Indicate the number of records reviewed,
the number found to be compliant, an explanation of the root cause for any
continued noncompliance, and a description of additional corrective actions to be
taken by the district to address any identified noncompliance by February 7,
2013.
SE Criterion # 20 - Least restrictive program selected
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
A review of student records demonstrated that the non-participation justification
statement in IEPs of students in out-of-district placements explain why the
removal is considered critical to the student's program and the basis for the
Team's conclusion that the education of the student in a less restrictive
environment, with the use of supplementary aids and services, could not be
achieved satisfactorily.
SE Criterion # 24 - Notice to parent regarding proposal or refusal to
initiate or change the identification, evaluation, or educational placement
of the child or the provision of FAPE
Rating:
Partially Implemented
Basis for Findings:
A review of student records indicated that when a parent requests an evaluation,
the information included in the narrative description of the Notice of Proposed
School District Action (N1) does not consistently address all the guiding
questions. Specifically they do not include all of the following: a description of
the action proposed or refused by the school; an explanation of why the school
proposed or refused to take the action; a description of any other options the
school considered and the reasons why those options were rejected; a description
of each evaluation procedure, test, record, or report the school used as a basis of
the proposed action; a description of any other factors that were relevant to the
school's proposal.
Department Order of Corrective Action:
The district in response to their WBMS self evaluation analyzed the information
included in the N1 forms and has established the root cause for the non
compliance. Based on this root cause analysis, the district must indicate the
specific corrective actions that have been taken to remedy the non-compliance.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
West Bridgewater Mid-Cycle Report - 06/04/2012
Page 4 of 8
SE Criterion # 24 - Notice to parent regarding proposal or refusal to
initiate or change the identification, evaluation, or educational placement
of the child or the provision of FAPE
Develop an internal oversight and tracking system to ensure that page 2 of the
N1 form is appropriately completed. The tracking system should include
supervisory oversight prior to sending the N1 form to the parent and periodic
reviews to ensure compliance.
Develop a report of the results of an internal review of student records from all
grades in which an N1 form was written to propose an initial evaluation since the
implementation of all of the district's corrective actions for evidence of compliance
with responding to all of the questions on page 2 of the N1 form.
Please note when conducting internal monitoring the district must maintain the
following documentation and make it available to the Department upon request:
(a) List of student names and grade levels for the records reviewed; (b) Date of
the review; (c) Name of person(s) who conducted the review, with their role(s)
and signature(s).
Required Elements of Progress Reports:
Submit a detailed narrative description of the result of the root cause analysis as
well as the corrective action steps taken to by the district to remedy the
noncompliance. Please be sure to indicate the person(s) responsible by name
and role and a timeline for implementation of the corrective action steps. Please
submit this to the Department by October 5, 2012.
Provide the results of the administrative review of student records. Indicate the
number of records reviewed, the number found to be compliant, an explanation of
the root cause of any continued noncompliance, and a description of additional
corrective actions to be taken by the district to address any identified
noncompliance by February 7, 2013.
SE Criterion # 25 - Parental consent
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Interviews with staff members demonstrated that the district has procedures in
place to address when a parent revokes consent to special education services in
writing. Specifically, that when a parent revokes consent in writing to special
education services, the district would provide written notice to the parent of the
district'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 district would provide notice within a reasonable time
before it intended to discontinue services. District staff members are aware that
they may not use mediation or request a due process hearing to obtain
agreement or a ruling for continuation of services. At the time of the review no
parents have revoked consent for services.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
West Bridgewater Mid-Cycle Report - 06/04/2012
Page 5 of 8
SE Criterion # 26 - Parent participation in meetings
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
The district provided the student roster documentation required by the
Department.
SE Criterion # 37 - Procedures for approved and unapproved out-ofdistrict placements
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
The student record review indicated that the records of students in out-of-district
placements contained monitoring plans and documentation of actual monitoring.
SE Criterion # 46 - Procedures for suspension of students with
disabilities when suspensions exceed 10 consecutive school days or a
pattern has developed for suspensions exceeding 10 cumulative days;
responsibilities of the Team; responsibilities of the district
Rating:
Partially Implemented
Basis for Findings:
A review of district documentation revealed that the student code of conduct
contained in handbooks at the elementary level does not have appropriate
procedures regarding the discipline of students with special needs and students
with Section 504 Accommodation Plans that are consistent with Federal
Requirements (IDEA-97) 34 CFR 300.530-537. Specifically, the information in
the handbook incorrectly states that the student's IEP must be amended to
provide appropriate special education during the time of suspension and that, if a
parent does not accept the amended plan, the school system is under no
obligation to provide alternative services to a suspended student.
Department Order of Corrective Action:
The district must revise the student code of conduct distributed at the elementary
school level to ensure that the procedures regarding the discipline of students
with special needs and students with Section 504 Accommodation Plans are
consistent with all aspects of IDEA-97 34 CFR 300.530-537.
Once the revision is complete incorporate the revised student code of conduct
into the elementary level handbooks and develop a plan to disseminate the
revised plan to all staff and families.
Provide training to the principals, Team Chairs and special education teachers at
the elementary level on the correct procedures regarding the discipline of
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
West Bridgewater Mid-Cycle Report - 06/04/2012
Page 6 of 8
SE Criterion # 46 - Procedures for suspension of students with
disabilities when suspensions exceed 10 consecutive school days or a
pattern has developed for suspensions exceeding 10 cumulative days;
responsibilities of the Team; responsibilities of the district
students with disabilities.
Required Elements of Progress Reports:
Submit the revised code of conduct containing the correct information regarding
the discipline of students with disabilities. Submit the elementary level
handbooks for the 2012-2013 school year containing the revised information.
Please be sure to indicate the timeline for dissemination and indicate the
person(s) responsible by name and role. Submit this to the Department by
October 5, 2012.
Provide evidence that principals, Team Chairs and SPED teachers at the
elementary level have been trained on the correct procedures regarding the
discipline of students with disabilities which will include the training agenda,
attendance sheet (including names and roles) and copies of the material
presented. Provide this to the Department by February 7, 2013.
SE Criterion # 48 - FAPE (Free, appropriate, public education): Equal
opportunity to participate in educational, nonacademic, extracurricular
and ancillary programs, as well as participation in regular education
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
A review of student records, district documentation and interviews with staff
members indicated that 7th and 8th grade students with disabilities have the
same equal access to art, music, physical education and computer classes as their
general education peers.
SE Criterion # 53 - Use of paraprofessionals
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
Interviews with staff members and a review of district documentation
demonstrated that paraprofessionals do not provide special education services
without the supervision of an appropriately certified or licensed professional.
SE Criterion # 55 - Special education facilities and classrooms
Rating:
Implemented
Basis for Findings:
On site observations and interviews with staff members indicated that the space
used for counseling by the READS Collaborative Program at West Bridgewater
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
West Bridgewater Mid-Cycle Report - 06/04/2012
Page 7 of 8
SE Criterion # 55 - Special education facilities and classrooms
High School is equal in physical respects to the average standards of the general
education facilities. Services are no longer provided in a large space off of the
cafeteria that did not lend itself to confidentiality. Specifically, interviews and
observations showed that counselors have access to an appropriate space that
has been set aside for the READS Collaborative Program's exclusive use.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education – Program Quality Assurance Services
West Bridgewater Mid-Cycle Report - 06/04/2012
Page 8 of 8