MassachusettsDepartment of

Elementary and Secondary Education

75 Pleasant Street, Malden, Massachusetts 02148-4096 Telephone: (781) 338-3700

TTY: N.E.T. Relay 1-800-439-2370

October 1, 2013

Joan Landers, Superintendent

North Middlesex Regional School District

45Main Street

Pepperell, MA 01463

Re: Mid-cycle Report

Dear Superintendent Landers:

Enclosed is the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education's Mid-cycle Report based on the onsite visit conducted in your district in March 2013. During the Mid-Cycle Review the Department monitored selected special education criteria to determine your district’s compliance with special education laws and regulations. The review consisted of information gathered from one or more of the following activities: interviews, review of student records, examination of documentation, and classroom observation(s).

The Department determined that one or more of the criteria monitored in your district was “Partially Implemented” or “Not Implemented.” In all instances where noncompliance was found, the Department has prescribed corrective action for the district. This corrective action must be implemented 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 submitting progress reports using the enclosed form.

Please provide the Department with your written assurance that all of the required corrective action will be implemented by your district within the timelines specified in the report. You must submit your statement of assurance to Darlene Lynch, Director, Program Quality Assurance Services, by October 18, 2013.

Your staff's cooperation throughout this Mid-cycle Review is appreciated. If you have questions about this letter or the enclosed report, please do not hesitate to contact Randall Palmer at 781-338-3734.

Sincerely,

Randall Palmer, Mid-cycle Review Chairperson

Program Quality Assurance Services

Darlene A. Lynch, Director

Program Quality Assurance Services

cc:Mitchell D. Chester, Ed.D., Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education

Jane Ewing, Supervisor, Program Quality Assurance Services

Susan Robbins, School Committee Chairperson

Linda Rakiey, Local Program Review Coordinator

Encs:Mid-cycle Report

Mid-cycle Progress Report Form

North Middlesex Regional School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report

October 1, 2013

Page 1 of 18

MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE REPORT

NORTH MIDDLESEX REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

Dates of the Mid-cycle Review Onsite: March 28 & 29, 2013

Date of this Report: October 1, 2013

PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS REPORT IS IN TWO SECTIONS.

Required Special Education Criteria Monitored in this Mid-cycle Review

Current special education criteria available by scrolling down to the special education instrument at http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/default.html

Criterion / Criterion Implemented
 / Criterion Partially Implemented (PI) or Not Implemented(NI) / Method(s) of
Investigation / Basis of Determination about Criterion / If Partially Implemented or Not Implemented:
(a)Required Corrective Action and
Timelines for Implementation / (b) Progress Report Due Date(s) and Required
Elements
SE 7
Transfer of parental rights and student participation and consent at age of majority / PI / Document Review
Student Record Review / Document and record review indicated that one year prior to a student reaching age 18, the districtdoes not consistently inform the student and the parent/guardian of the rights that will transfer from the parent to the student upon the student’s 18th birthday.
Record review also demonstrated that the districtdoes not consistently document that the parent and student were informed of the transfer of decision-making rights in the IEPor the student record.
Additionally, record review indicated that once a student has reached the age of 18, the district does not always obtain consent from the student to continue the student’s special education program. / Develop a procedure for notifying families and students of the transfer of educational decision-making rights to the student at the age of majority based on the ESE’s administrative advisory 2011-1
http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/advisories/11_1.html.
Please provide training to IEP Team chairpersons and other key personnel at the high school level on the district’s newly developed age of majority policy.
Please develop a tracking and monitoring system and identify the key personnel responsible for oversight of the system and for conducting periodic reviews to ensure the following:
1) parents and students are notified of the transfer of educational decision-making rights one year prior to students reaching the age of 18, 2) IEP Teams document the provision of this notice in the IEP or in the student record thereafter, and 3)students with educational decision-making rights sign their IEPs once they have turned 18.
Conduct an internal review of student records.Select a sample of special education students who turned 17 after implementation of all corrective actions. Review the students’ special education records for evidence that 1) families and students were notified one year prior to the student turning 18 and 2) provision of this notification was documented either in the IEP or in the student record.
Conduct a second internal reviewof a sample of special education students who turned 18 after implementation of all corrective actions. Review their records for evidence that the district has obtained the student’s signature on the current IEP when the student has sole or shared educational decision rights.
*Please note that 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 level for the record review; b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the review, their roles(s), and their signature(s). / Submit a copy of revised procedures and evidence of staff training, including an agenda and signed attendance sheets (indicating role of staff).
Submit the description of the oversight system and identify the person(s) responsible for the oversight, including the date of the system’s implementation.
This progress report is dueNovember 18, 2013.
Submit the results of both student record reviews. Indicate the number of student records reviewed, the number of student records in compliance, for all records not in compliance with this criterion, determine the root cause(s) of the noncompliance and provide the district’s plan to remedy the non-compliance.
This progress report is due March 17, 2014.
SE 8
IEP Team composition and attendance / PI / Student
Record Review
Staff Interviews / Student record review and interviews indicated that the district has a process to ensure that required IEP Team members attend IEP meetings. This process includesobtaining the parent’s permission in writing to excuse Team members who are not necessary because their area of the curriculum or services is not being modified or discussed.
However, record review also indicated that when a student is involved in a regular education program, a regular education teacher is not always present at Team meetings.
In addition,there wasno evidence in student records that excused required Team membersprovidewritten input into the development of the IEP to the parent and the IEP team prior to the meeting.
Review of student records and interviews indicated that there is always a representative of the district present at Team meetings with the authority to commit the resources of the district. / Revise the district’sprocedures for IEP Team composition and excusalto include the following: 1) regular education teachersarepresent as required Team members when the student may be involved in a regular education programor excused by the parent before the meeting and 2) excused required Team members must provide written input in advance to the Team and parents for IEP development.
Following the revision of these procedures, provide training to IEP Team chairs andrelevantstaff members on team composition and excusal requirements.
Please develop an internal system of periodic review to ensure that 1) a regular education teacher attends IEP meetings for students when the student is involved in a regular education program; 2) a written excusal from the parent is in the student record if a required Team member cannot attend; and 3)the excused Team member provides written input for IEP development. Please identify the person(s) responsible by name and title for this internal monitoring.
Conduct an internal review of student records. Select a sample of 10 special education students across all school levels who are involved in general education and who had IEP development activities after the implementation of all corrective actions. Review the students’ special education records for evidence that 1) a general education teacher attended the IEP meeting; 2) if no general education teacher attended, the parent excused the teacher in writing prior to the meeting; and 3) the excused general education teacherprovided written input prior to the meeting.
Conduct a second internal review of student records. Select a sample of 15 special education students across all school levels who had IEP development activities after the implementation of all corrective actions. Review the students’ special education records for evidence that 1) required Team members were excused by the parent in writing prior to the meeting; and 2) the excused Team memberprovided written input prior to the meeting.
*Please note when conducting internal monitoring that the district must maintain the following documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of the student names and grade levels for the records reviewed; b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the review, their role(s), and signature(s). / Submit a copy of revised procedures and evidence of staff training, including an agenda and signed attendance sheets (indicating role of staff).
Submit the description of the oversight system and identify the person(s) responsible for the oversight, including the date of the system’s implementation.
This progress report is dueNovember 18, 2013.
Submit the results of both student record reviews. Indicate the number of student records reviewed, the number of student records in compliance, for all records not in compliance with this criterion, determine the root cause(s) of the noncompliance and provide the district’s plan to remedy the non-compliance.
This progress report is due March 17, 2014.
SE 18A
IEP Development and content /  / Student Record Review
Staff
Interviews / Review of student records and staff interviews indicated that IEPsare completed addressing all elements of the most current IEP format provided by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Specifically, record review demonstrated that Teams address the student’s current performance related to the general curriculum and other educational needs in the Present Level of Educational Performance A and B (PLEP A and PLEP B).
Review of student records and staff interviewsindicate that whenever the IEP Team evaluation indicates that a student's disability affects social skills development, or when the student's disability makes him or her vulnerable to bullying, harassment, or teasing, the IEP addresses the skills and proficiencies needed to avoid and respond to bullying, harassment, or teasing.
For students identified with a disability on the autism spectrum, the IEP Team considers and specifically addresses the skills and proficiencies needed to avoid and respond to bullying, harassment, or teasing.
SE 25
Parental consent /  / Student Record Review
Staff
Interviews / Review of student records and interviews indicated that the district does not begin services prior to receiving written parental consent to the IEP. Additionally, records indicated that when an IEP goes unsigned for an extended period of time, the district makes attempts to secure the consent of the parent through multiple means using a variety of methods which are documented by the district.
The school has a process in place so that when a parent revokes consent in writing, the school will promptly provide the parent with a written notice of the school’s proposal to discontinue services within a reasonable period of time, as well as how the parent can obtain a copy of his/her right to procedural safeguards.
According to its procedures, the school will not use mediation or a due process hearing to overrule the parent’s revocation request.
SE 51
Appropriate
special education
teacher licensure
(Commonwealth Charter Schools only) / Not Applicable / North Middlesex Regional is a regional school district.

Additional Special Education Criteria Monitored in this Mid-cycle Review

Current special education criteria available by scrolling down to the special education instrument at http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/default.html

Criterion / Criterion Implemented
 / Criterion Partially Implemented (PI) or Not Implemented (NI) / Method(s) of
Investigation / Basis of Determination about Criterion / If Partially Implemented or Not Implemented:
(a) Required Corrective Action and Timelines for Implementation / (b) Progress Report Due Date(s) and Required
Elements
SE 2
Required and optional assessments /  / Student Record Review
Staff Interviews / Review of student records indicated that an educational assessment by a representative of the school district, including a history of the student’s educational progress in the general curriculum, is consistently documented in the student record. Also, for students identified with significant health issues, a comprehensive health assessment by a physician that identifies medical problems is evident in the student record.
SE 3
Special requirements for determination of specific learning disability /  / Student Record Review
Staff Interviews / Student records and interviews indicated that when a student is suspected of having a specific learning disability, the district consistently creates a written determination of Specific Learning Disability (SLD),to document the student’s disability designation. The district is completing the required written eligibility determination form for the four components used to determine eligibility: Historic review and educational assessment (SLD 1), Area of concern and evaluation method (SLD 2), Exclusionary factors (SLD 3) and Observation (SLD 4) for students suspected of having a specific learning disability.
SE 4
Reports of assessment results /  / Student Record Review
Staff Interviews / Student record review and interviews indicated that reports of assessment results define in detail and in educationally relevant terms the student's needs, offering explicit means of meeting them. Further, assessment summaries do not state that recommendations would be discussed and made at the Team meeting.
SE 6
Determination of transition services /  / Student Record Review
Staff Interviews / Review of student recordsand interviews indicated that IEPTeams consistently discussstudent transition needs for students 14 years and older. Transition Planning forms are consistently completed for these students and placedin the student’s recordwith the IEP.
Records also revealed that IEP Teams annually reviewand updatethe information on the Transition Planning form as appropriate.
SE 9
Timeline for determination of eligibility and provision of documentation to parent /  / Student Record Review
Staff Interviews / Student records and interviews indicated that the district consistently meetsthe 45 day timeline to determine whether the student is eligible for special education and provides the parent with either a proposed IEP or a written explanation of the finding of no eligibility.
SE 12
Frequency of re-evaluation /  / Student Record Review
Staff Interviews / Review of student records and interviews indicated that the district consistently conducts full re-evaluations every three years consistent with the requirements of federal law,unless the parent and district agree otherwise.
SE 13
Progress reports and content /  / Student Record Review / Student record review indicated that progress reports are consistently present in the student records. Further, progress reports at all school levels consistently include written information on the student's progress toward the annual goals in the IEP.
SE 14
Review and revision of IEPs /  / Student Record Review
Staff Interviews / Review of student records and interviews indicated that the district consistently holds Team meetings annually, on or before the anniversary date of the IEP, to review, revise, or develop a new IEP or refer the student for a re-evaluation, as appropriate.
SE 18B
Determination of placement; provision of IEP to parent / PI / Student Record Review
Staff Interviews / Review of student records and interviews indicated that all IEP placement pages are consistently signed by parents.
However, the district does not always provide its signed assuranceat the time the proposed IEP is presented to the parent. Record review demonstrated that the date indicating when the parent accepted the IEP preceded the date of the district’s assurance on the IEP. / Please develop a protocol to ensure that all proposed IEPs are signed by a district representative before they are mailed to parents.
Please develop an internal system of supervisory oversight and periodic reviews to ensure that proposed IEPs are signed by the LEA representative before sent to parents.Please identify the person(s) responsible by name and title for this internal monitoring and ensure that they are aware of their responsibilities.
Please conduct a student record review of 15 records for evidence that proposed IEPs are signed before they are sent out. This sample must be drawn from records of students whose IEP development meetings were convened after implementation of all corrective actions.
*Please note when conducting internal monitoring that the district must maintain the following documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of the student names and grade levels for the records reviewed; b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the review, their role(s), and signature(s). / Submit a copy of the revised protocols.
Submit the description of the oversight system and identify the person(s) responsible for the oversight, including the date of the system’s implementation.
This progress report is dueNovember 18, 2013.
Submit the results of the student recordreview. Indicate the number of student records reviewed, the number of student records in compliance, for all records not in compliance with this criterion, determine the root cause(s) of the noncompliance and provide the district’s plan to remedy the non-compliance.
This progress report is due March 17, 2014.
SE 22
IEP implementation and availability /  / Student Record Review
Staff Interviews / Review of student records and interviews indicated that the school district provides consented-to services without delay. When a delay occurs the district informs the parent in writing as required, or offers alternative methods to meet goals on the accepted IEP.
Student records also demonstrated that the district has an IEP in effect for each eligible student at the beginning of each school year. Interviews indicated that teachers and providers described in the IEP are always informed of their specific responsibilities related to the implementation of the student’s IEP and the specific accommodations, modifications, and supports that must be provided for the student.
SE 24
Notice to parent /  / Student Record Review
Staff Interviews / Student record reviewand interviews indicated that when a parent requests an evaluation to determine special education eligibility for students who are participating in an instructional support process, the district sends written notice to the parent within 5 school days of receipt of the referral.
SE 25A
Sending of copy of notice to the Bureau of Special Education Appeals /  / Document review
Staff Interviews / Review of documents and interviews indicated that within five calendar days of receiving notice that a parent is requesting a hearing or has rejected an IEP, proposed placement, or finding of no eligibility for special education, the district sends a copy of the rejected IEP to Special Education Appeals as required.
SE 29
Communications are in English and primary language of the home /  / Student Record Review
Staff Interviews / Review of student records, and interviews indicated that the district’swritten communications to parents are in the primary language of the home, if that primary language is other than English. Interviews also indicated that the district has a formal system for the use of oral interpreters and translation, including Braille for student and parents/guardians.
SE 55
Special education facilities and classrooms /  / Observation
Staff
Interviews / Observation and interviews demonstrated that the two roomsused for North Middlesex Regional High School’s Life Skills program are adequate for the number of students and adults using the space. These rooms are located near the main office area and other general education classrooms,thereby maximizingthe inclusion of thestudents into the life of the school.
SE 56
Special education programs and services are evaluated /  / Document Review
Staff Interviews / Documentation and interviews indicated that the district regularly evaluatesitsspecial education programs and services.The district provided a copy of a 2012 evaluation by Walker Partnerships of its district-wide Therapeutic Learning Centers at the elementary, middle, and high school levels as evidence.

North Middlesex Regional School District Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report