CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AND FOCUSED MONITORING PROCESS
DIVISION OF EDUCATIONAL IMPROVEMENT AND ASSISTANCE
OFFICE OF STUDENT AND SCHOOL PERFORMANCE
RANDOM MONITORING COMPONENT
DATE OF ON-SITE MONITORING:
February 26-29, 2007
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
St. Martin Parish School System
Valerie Haaga, Superintendent
Bridget Lovvorn, Supervisor of Special Education
ON-SITE TEAM LEADERS
Sherlyn Ezell Powell & Maggie Brolin
ON-SITE TEAM MEMBERS
Mylinda Elliott
Diana Jones
Nanette Olivier
Carolyn Pansy
Mark Berry
Nancy Hicks
Linda Champion
Introduction
A team of nine monitors conducted an on-site visit to St. Martin Parish School System on
February 26-29, 2007, as a component of the state’s Continuous Improvement and Focused
Monitoring Process. St. Martin Parish School System was selected for on-site monitoring among
the local education agencies (LEAs) included in the state monitoring system’s Population Group
3 (LEAs with an October 1 general education student count of 7,000-17,599 under the Random
category of monitoring.
Demographic and performance information regarding St. Martin Parish School System can be
found in the State Special Education Data Profile publication and the school performance
profiles located on the department’s website at www.louisianaschools.net/eia/specialp/2115.
Monitoring Strategies, Methods and Activities
Review of 78 student records, including random and purposeful reviews of students’ IEPs,
evaluation reports, report cards, and class schedules.
Review of the Special Education Policies and Procedures Handbook and forms currently in use.
Review of disciplinary records at school sites and central office (for data validation purposes).
Interviews with 28 school-site personnel, including administrators, regular educators, special
educators, and paraeducators in 9 schools in the school system.
Interviews with 6 central office personnel.
Observations of services being provided to students through on-site visits to schools, including 2
elementary schools, 3 junior high schools, and 4 high schools.
Information gathered from 15 parents who attended a parent focus meeting.
Interviews by telephone with 14 parents, including follow-up calls to parents who attended the
parent meeting. (A parent focus group meeting was conducted on February 26, 2007. This
meeting was open to parents of students with disabilities and monitoring team members. Notes
taken during the parent meeting were considered in the investigative process.)
The Louisiana Department of Education collects data on adolescent transition services for
reporting in the 2008 Annual Performance Report (APR) to the federal government and reporting
for a 2006-07 Performance Indicator to the Louisiana State Legislature. In St. Martin Parish,
100% (28 of 28) of the records reviewed of students ages 16 and above were found to have
coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services that should reasonably enable
students to meet post-secondary goals.
Validation on site of data being reported to the state and federal government by the St. Martin
Parish School System was also a monitoring activity. Data on the removal of students with
disabilities for code-of-conduct violations showed no inconsistencies in tracking in 4 of the 8
schools in the sample. The Annual Report of Children Served, Table 5, Section B, Columns 3A,
3B, and 3C were accurate.
Specific Evidence of Non-Compliance was found in the following areas:

§444B.1; §519E.2.- Discipline

§444E.1,2; FAPE- Progress and benefit from the general curriculum-effective
supports and services
2

§444E.1,2; FAPE- Progress and benefit from the general curriculum-individualized
instruction in resource room

§401.C; §444B.5; §904 Assistive Technology 4.5.6. FAPE- Related services-Assistive
Technology for students with significant disabilities
Note: The Student-Specific Findings of Non-Compliance pages in this report contain
confidential information and should be deleted from the report when copies are made for
the general public.
3
Findings of Non-Compliance
St. Martin Parish School System
Reg. Ref. #
§401.C;
§444.E.1-2.
Description of Finding
FAPE – including IEP
Content and Format:
Students are not receiving
effective supports and
services with
accommodations, which
enable them to benefit
from and make progress in
the general curriculum.
Supporting Evidence
Seventy-three records of students who were currently failing two or more
subjects in the general curriculum were purposefully reviewed to examine
the effectiveness of supports and services with accommodations that were
provided for the students. Sixty-two of the 73 records had no
documentation that the students’ failures had been addressed in any way.
There was no indication that meetings, conferences, or written or oral
communication of any kind had been utilized. There was no
documentation that accommodations or modifications were examined or
adjusted to deal with student failure.
Comments
In purposeful interviews with 11 of 18 special education teachers, it was
expressed that student failures had not been appropriately monitored nor
had accommodations been changed to address the problem. Reasons given
for the lack of services were as follows: time constraints to collaborate
with general education teachers; absenteeism (adjusting accommodations
for the classroom were pointless if students do not attend school
regularly); and student motivation.
Five of seven general education teachers interviewed revealed that they
were aware that the students were failing but had not requested additional
accommodations or modifications to assist students to be successful in
their general education classes. The five teachers expressed that no new
accommodations or modifications had been tried. All seven teachers
stated that they were presently using all the prescribed accommodations
and modifications such as preferential seating, extended time, proximity
control, and sending students to their special education teachers to take
tests. Reasons given for lack of student success were as follows: lack of
student effort; lack of support from home/homework completion; not
enough one-on-one instruction from special services; and absenteeism.
4
Findings of Non-Compliance
St. Martin Parish School System
Reg. Ref. #
Description of Finding
Supporting Evidence
Seven parent interviews also revealed a lack of utilization of appropriate
accommodations and modifications to address student failures.
§401.C.
FAPE:
Seven of seven purposefully reviewed records at one school indicated that
students were functioning three or more grade levels below the
instructional level delivered in the classroom. All seven students were not
progressing or benefiting from the general curriculum as evidenced by
their failing grades.
Some students in resource
rooms are not receiving
individualized instruction
at a level at which they can
benefit from and make
progress in the general
curriculum.
§401.
§444.B.1.
§519.E.2.
FAPE – including IEP
Content and Format;
FAPE – including
Discipline Procedures:
Effective strategies
including positive
behavioral intervention
strategies and supports to
address behaviors that
impede students’ progress
in the general curriculum
and IEP implementation
are not addressed through
An interview with the teacher revealed that although the students were
given individualized attention, the instructional level for the classroom
was for a specific grade and not individualized to the functional level of
each student.
Comments
Students in resource
rooms must receive
instruction on a level
commensurate with
their skill levels so
they can be successful
and benefit and make
progress in the general
curriculum.
Records of Behavior Intervention Plans (BIPs) were reviewed for 28
students who had been suspended from school during the present
academic year. While positive behavioral supports were indicated in the
Behavior Intervention Plans, there was no documentation that the positive
behavioral supports written in the plans had been implemented in 19 of
the 28 plans.
After thorough examination of 19 student records and after interviewing
12 school personnel concerning the effectiveness of Behavior Intervention
Plans, it was determined that inappropriate student behaviors were not
changed as a result of the behavior plans for these students. The records
reviewed indicated that the Behavior Intervention Plans were not
effectively revised as students’ inappropriate behavior continued and/or
escalated.
5
Findings of Non-Compliance
St. Martin Parish School System
Reg. Ref. #
Description of Finding
the students’ instructional
program.
Supporting Evidence
Comments
Ten records had no documentation that the Behavior Intervention Plans
had been implemented at all. Nine of the 14 on-site personnel
purposefully interviewed corroborated that the Behavior Intervention
Plans are usually not implemented across settings. When asked questions
about discipline and high suspension rates, eight of the 14 on-site
personnel expressed that suspensions did not deter infractions as
evidenced by repeated infractions. They also stated that students’
inappropriate classroom behaviors impede their academic and social
learning and that these behaviors are not currently being addressed
through the instructional program in a manner that results in behavior
change; thus, the inappropriate behaviors continue, and student learning is
impeded. The school personnel expressed that students who return from
suspensions often immediately repeat the inappropriate behaviors that
they were suspended for because of the lack of effective positive supports
in place through the instructional program.
Seven parents of students who exhibited behavior problems were
interviewed. All seven parents reported that they felt that the behavior
interventions conducted by the school system were not effective based on
repeat infractions of the children.
The team determined that effective strategies including positive
behavioral intervention strategies and supports to address behaviors that
impede students learning are not addressed through the students’
instructional program for all students.
§401.C;
§444.B.5;
§904
FAPE – including IEP
Content and Format and
Assistive Technology
Although assistive technology devices such as speaking devices, picture
communication cards, auditory puzzles and verbal output devices are
available for students to use, the devices are not adequately utilized for
6
Findings of Non-Compliance
St. Martin Parish School System
Reg. Ref. #
Assistive
Technology
4.5.6.
Description of Finding
Services:
Assistive technology
services are not provided to
students with significant
disabilities that would
enable students to utilize
necessary assistive
technology devices in order
to make educational
progress.
Supporting Evidence
students with significant disabilities.
Comments
Five of six purposefully reviewed records indicated that students with
significant disabilities were not utilizing assistive technology devices or
services that would afford them the opportunity to make educational
progress.
Six of six interviews with teachers and supervisors indicated that assistive
technology devices were available for students, but two of two
observations in classrooms and questions targeted at the utilization of
devices indicated that the equipment was not actually being used
adequately.
Five of the six interviewees who were asked whether students with
significant disabilities are adequately using assistive technology to make
educational progress stated that they were not. Reasons given were as
follows: lack of specific training on the utilization of devices; a mismatch
of devices and specific student needs.
7