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
May 9, 2007
James Marini, Superintendent
Winchester Public Schools
154 Horn Pond Brook Road
Winchester, MA 01890
Re: Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report March ‘07
Dear Dr. Marini:
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 Winchester Public Schools Coordinated
Program Review Report issued on June 25, 2004. 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 May 31, 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 781-338-3703.
Sincerely,
Dean Paolillo, Mid-cycle Review Chairperson
Program Quality Assurance Services
Darlene A. Lynch, Director
Program Quality Assurance Services
c:
David P. Driscoll, Commissioner of Education
Sarah Swiger, School Committee Chairperson
Linda Stapp, District Program Review Follow-up Coordinator
Marc Kerble, District Program Review Follow-up Coordinator
Encl.: Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report
Mid-cycle Cover Letter 2007.doc
Rev. 11/14/06
2
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT
Winchester Public Schools
ONSITE MONITORING OF IMPLEMENTATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION AND OF CERTAIN NEW REQUIREMENTS
Date of Coordinated Program Review (CPR): January 12, 2004
Date of Coordinated Program Review Corrective Action Plan Approval: September 24, 2004
Dates of Corrective Action Plan Progress Reports: January 10, 2005
Dates of this Mid-cycle Review Onsite Visit: March 7& 8, 2007
Date of this Report: May 7, 2007
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS REPORT IS IN SEVERAL SECTIONS.
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 1 of 19
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2006-2007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implement
ed 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
Educational status
assessments (Educational
Assessment Part A) are not
always completed as part
of the student’s initial
evaluation
The district will conduct a
record review of initial
evaluations to ensure
Educational Assessments
(part A) are included as part
of the assessment to
determine eligibility. The
district will review the
period between May 1, 2007
through September 30, 2007
and report the results of its
Special Ed.
Criteria Cited in
CPR Report and
Monitored in
Mid-cycle
MOA 4
Disproportionality
(if Cited in the
CPR Report)
SE 1 Assessments
This
criterion was
not cited in
the
Coordinated
Program
Review
report.

Student Record
Review &
Interviews
The review of evaluations in the
student records indicated that
district personnel document the
student’s ability to progress in the
general education setting.
New Issue
Identified
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 2 of 19
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2006-2007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implement
ed 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
record review and the
corrective action taken as
part of its progress report
due October 2, 2007.

SE 2
Required and
Optional
Assessments
Student Record
Review &
Interviews
Education status assessments (part
B) were documented in those
records in which the district
conducted the evaluation of the
student. A notable exception was
found in record(s) in which the
student had moved into the district
and was not scheduled for a reevaluation.
Statutory requirements for
the determination of specific
learning disabilities have
been revised under the
recently reauthorized IDEA
2004. Therefore, the
Department is not making
findings related to school
district practices under
Criterion SE 3. For districts
seeking to resolve a
previous finding in this area,
the Department will extend
the date required for final
actions on the part of the
SE 3
SLD
Determination
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 3 of 19
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2006-2007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implement
ed 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
school district and will
consider resolution
following the issuance by
MA DOE of guidance
regarding the
implementation of related
federal regulations.
Student Record
Review
SE 4
Report of
Assessment
Results
New Issue
Identified
The review of student
evaluations indicated that
in a few instances,
evaluators deferred
making recommendations
to the discussion in the
Team meeting and did not
document their
recommendations in the
evaluation summary.

SE 18A
IEP Development
Student Record
Review &
Interviews
The review of IEPs developed by
school personnel indicates that the
IEPs report on the student’s ability
to access the general curriculum
and how the disability of the
student impacts the student’s
progress within the general
curriculum.
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 4 of 19
The district will review the
requirements of the
summary report with all
persons responsible for
reviewing the summary
reports prior to the release of
the reports to parents. The
training agenda and
attendance sheet will be
provided to the Department
by October 2, 2007.
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2006-2007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implement
ed 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
New Issue
Identified
N1 notices that accompany
proposed IEPs do not
always fully address the
key questions. In some
instances, parental
commentary indicated
disagreement with the
Team over rejected
options; however, the N1
notices stated that there
were no options rejected
by the Team.
The district will review the
content requirements of N1
notices with all staff
members responsible for the
completion of N1 or N2
notices. The training agenda
and attendance sheet will be
provided to the Department
for verification. The
corrective action is due
October 2, 2007.
New Issue
Identified
The student record review
indicated that the Team
did not always document
that the parent did not
require translated
The district will review this
finding with all of the
district’s chairpersons. The
district will provide the
Department with a copy of

SE 18 B
Placement
Student Record
Review &
Interviews
Parents sign the IEP placement
pages. IEPs document the parental
concerns. Staff interviews indicated
that parents have input into the
development of the IEP.
SE 24 Notices
SE 29
Communications
Student Record
Review &
Interviews
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 5 of 19
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2006-2007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implement
ed 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
documentation when the
home language was other
than English but the parent
was fluent and literate in
English (i.e. a bi-lingual or
multi-lingual household).
its memo to school
personnel regarding this
issue. A copy of the memo
must be provided to the
Department by October 2,
2007.
Placement agreements are
contained in the student
record, however,
description of its onsite
monitoring activities and
documentation of the
district’s onsite monitoring
activities are not contained
in the student record.
The district will train the
out-of-district chairperson(s)
regarding the onsite out-ofdistrict monitoring
requirements. The district
will provide the Department
with documentation of its
training activities, including
the agenda by October 2,
2007.

SE 34
Continuum
Documentation
Review
SE 37
Out-of-District
Student Record
Review &
Interviews
The district has a continuum of
programs and services to address
the majority of student needs.
Partial
Implementation
of the corrective
action

SE 48
FAPE
Interviews
The district remedied accessibility
to music and library activities for
preschool students at the Lynch
School.
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 6 of 19
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2006-2007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implement
ed 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 review of district
documentation and
interviews indicated that
while a program
evaluation process was
developed corresponding
to the district’s corrective
action plan submitted to
the Department, the
program evaluation
activities were not
implemented.
The district will identify to
the Department how it
intends to evaluate its
special education programs,
who will participate in the
evaluation process and the
person(s) responsible for
ensuring the district’s
programs are evaluated and
how the evaluation results
will be used by the district
to implement program

SE 50
DCAP
Documentation
Review
The district has a District
Curriculum Accommodation Plan
(DCAP) and has actively trained its
teaching personnel on the content
and implementation of the DCAP.
Documentation
Review
The district has actively trained its
paraprofessionals and classroom
assistants to facilitate inclusion
practices.

SE 54
Professional
Development
SE 55
Facilities
SE 56 Program
Evaluation
Documentation &
Interviews
The district is addressing its
clustering of special education
programs at the Lynch School by
distributing programs throughout
the district’s schools.
Documentation
Review &
Interviews
Corrective
Action Not Fully
Implemented
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 7 of 19
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full text
of 2006-2007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implement
ed 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
changes if necessary. The
corrective action is due
October 2, 2007.
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 8 of 19
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
Partially
Implemented
Student Record
Review
Vision statements for students
provided specific detail for
students transitioning from high
school.
Partially
Implemented
A review of student records
indicated that the required
transition-planning chart was
not always used by district
personnel and kept in the
record with the student’s
IEP. More recent IEP Team
meetings indicated more
consistent use of the
transition-planning chart.
Please note that consistent with
the recently enacted IDEA 2004
regulations, the transitionplanning chart will become a
mandated form, which should be
maintained with the student’s IEP.
Refer to Administrative Advisory
SPED 2007-1 for guidance. The
Department has revised this form,
please check the Department’s
Special Education website for the
updates. Please review the new
requirements for transition
planning and services with
appropriate staff. No additional
progress report is required.
Student Record
Review,
Documentation
& Interviews
Team attendance sheets within the
student records examined
indicated that required Team
members attend the Team
meeting. District case managers
are trained to ensure the
participation of required
Special
Education
Criteria
created or
revised in
response to
IDEA-2004
SE 6 ##1 - 3
Determination
of Transition
Services
SE 8
IEP Team
composition
and attendance

Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 9 of 19
participants. Efforts to coordinate
participation are supported by the
building principals. The district
has developed an “exception for
attendance of required Team
members” form that requires
parental consent in the event that
such an occurrence requires the
parental pardon of a Team
member’s participation.
SE 12
Frequency of
re-evaluation
SE 13
Progress
Reports and
content

Student Record
Review
Student Record
Review
The review of student records
indicated that re-evaluations are
conducted at least every three
years.
Partially
Implemented
Progress reports are not
always developed and
provided consistent with the
report card cycle. Progress
reports within the cycle were
missing. Progress reports
were not always maintained
in the student record for each
of the student’s IEP goals.
In a few instances, progress
reports across all levels did
not address whether the
student would meet the
annual goals by the end of
the school year. Progress
reports demonstrated an
inconsistency of practice in
this regard. Furthermore,
some progress reports were
not dated or numbered,
making it difficult to
confirm the sequence of the
progress reporting. Student
records and staff interviews
indicated that a summary of
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 10 of 19
Please note that recently enacted
IDEA 2004 regulations have now
changed the content requirements
for IEP progress reports. Refer to
Administrative Advisory 2007-1
for guidance. The Department has
changed the progress report form
and it is now available on the
Department’s special education
website.
Please review the new
requirements with all appropriate
staff. Please review the new
progress report requirements with
staff. Please provide the district’s
written assurance that the review
of progress report requirements
has occurred with all applicable
staff. The written assurance is due
October 2, 2007.
academic achievement with
recommendations on how
the student can achieve his
or her postsecondary goals is
not kept in the record upon
the student’s graduation
from high school.
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 11 of 19
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented

Student Record
Review
The review of student records
indicated that a substantial number
of records had an annual review
prior to the anniversary date of the
IEP. In only a few instances were
annual reviews held after the
anniversary date. These few
records indicated that the meeting
was held within two to three
weeks of the anniversary date.
These few instances were not
sufficient to suggest systemic
noncompliance with this standard.

Documentation
Review &
Interviews
The district has indicated no
agreements to waive resolution
sessions have been entered by the
district since July 2006. The
district indicates that only one
mediation session has been
necessary since July 2006.
Student Record
Review,
Documentation
Review &
Interviews
The district uses special educators,
classroom based assistants to
facilitate student involvement in
the general education setting.
District curriculum is based upon
the state curriculum frameworks
and provided to all students with
SE 14
Review and
revision of
IEPs
SE 25B
Resolution of
disputes
Criterion
Determined
to be
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented

SE 33
Involvement in
the General
Curriculum
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 12 of 19
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
disabilities.

SE 39A
Procedures for
services to
eligible private
school students
whose parents
reside in the
district
Documentation
Review
District documentation and
interviews indicate that the district
evaluates private school students
who reside in district and makes
services available to those
students found eligible for special
education services.
Documentation
Review &
Interviews
The district does not have students
in private schools whose parents
reside out of state at this time.
(SE 39A does
not apply to
charter schools
or vocational
schools)
SE 39B
Procedures for
services to
eligible
students in
private schools
in the district
whose parents
reside out of
state

(SE 39B does
not apply to
charter schools
or vocational
schools)
SE 46
Procedures for
suspension of
Student Record
Review &
Documentation
New Issue
Identified
The school handbook(s) do
not make reference to the
specific requirements for the
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 13 of 19
The district should revise the
language in its school handbooks
and its administrative policies to
students with
disabilities
more than 10
days
Review
procedures for suspending
students with disabilities.
The policies and
administrative regulations
approved by the school
committee make reference to
Chapter 766 section 333.
The cited Chapter 766
regulations have been
obsolete since the adoption
of 603 CMR 28.00
numbering system. While
some elements of the
district’s local policies still
conform to the requirements
with IDEA 2004, the district
must endeavor to ensure its
all local, written policies are
consistent with current
federal and state
requirements and reference
current federal regulation.
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 14 of 19
reflect the current requirements
under IDEA 2004. The revised
policies must be submitted to the
Department by June 10, 2007.
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s) of
Verification
Yes
Documentation
Review &
Interview(s)
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 LEP
Please see ELE 1 and ELE 3
below.
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 15 of 19
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
Winchester Public Schools
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
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

ELE 1
Annual
Assessment
Yes
ELE 2
MCAS
Participation
Yes
ELE 3
Initial
Identification
Yes
ELE 4
Waiver
Partially
Implemented
Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
The district indicated that, as a low incidence district, this standard
does not apply to Winchester Public Schools. M.G.L. c 71A, section 5
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
The district will develop a waiver procedure
consistent with the requirements of this criterion.
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 16 of 19
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

Procedures
ELE 5
Program
Placement
and Structure
Partially
Implemented
ELE 6
Program Exit
and
Readiness
Yes
ELE 7
Parent
Involvement
Partially
Implemented
ELE 8
Declining
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
and the regulations under 603 CMR 14.04(3) do not exempt district
from developing waiver procedures because the district is a “low
incidence” district.
The district will submit its waiver procedures to
the Department by October 2, 2007.
The district’s provision of services currently consists of tutorial
pullout sessions provided by ELL tutors for English Language
Development (ELD). Currently, only two of the tutors are licensed as
ESL teachers. Two others are in the process of obtaining licensure
from the Department of Education. The district does not have
Sheltered English Immersion (SEI) classrooms. The district is
planning professional development workshops for the summer of
2007 to provide classroom teachers with training in SEI methodology.
The district will demonstrate full licensure of the
ELL tutors as ESL teachers. The district will
submit copies of the teacher licensures by October
2, 2007. The district will identify the SEI training
and the staff participants by level (i.e. elementary,
middle and high school) to the Department by
October 2, 2007.
The district provided information on how it reaches out to parents to
include parents in the educational experience of their children,
however, all the documents provided to parents are in English and not
the language of the home.
The district must translate the information
provided to parents of LEP students when required.
Samples of translated materials will be provided to
the Department by October 2, 2007.
Yes
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 17 of 19
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
Entry to a
Program
ELE 9
Instructional
Grouping
Yes
ELE 10
Parental
Notification
Partially
Implemented
ELE 11
Equal Access
to Academic
Programs
and Services
Yes
ELE 12
Equal Access
to
Nonacademic
and
Yes
The parent notification letter used by the district does not contain all
the elements required of this criterion. Specifically, its does not
indicate the basis for the student’s identification as an LEP student,
the child’s level of English proficiency or the right to apply for a
waiver.
The district will revise its letter to ensure
compliance with all applicable elements. The
district must also ensure copies of the letter are
available in the major languages of the district. The
district will submit copies of the revised letters to
the Department by October 2, 2007.
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 18 of 19
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
Extracurricular
Programs
ELE 13
Follow-up
Support
ELE 14
Licensure
Requirements
Yes
Partially
Implemented
Please see ELE 5 for comments regarding licensure.
Please see ELE 5 for the required corrective action.
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 19 of 19
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

ELE 15
Professional
Development
Requirements
Yes
ELE 16
Equitable
Facilities
Yes
ELE 17
Program
Evaluation
Partially
Implemented
ELE 18
Records of
LEP
Students(To be
reviewed
during next
CPR visit.)
Not Rated.
ELE student
records will be
reviewed during
the Department’s
next Coordinated
Program Review
visit.
Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
The district has not determined its methods of program evaluation,
however, consideration of MCAS performance by Limited English
Proficient students is considered in assessing student needs.
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
The district must develop a formal plan and
identify the plans components for evaluating its
English Language Learner program.
Mid-cycle Report Format 2007.doc
Rev. 1/3/07
Winchester Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
May 7, 2007
Page 20 of 19