MassachusettsDepartment of
Elementary and Secondary Education
75 Pleasant Street, Malden, Massachusetts02148-4096 Telephone: (781) 338-3700
TTY: N.E.T. Relay 1-800-439-2370
April 27, 2012
Barish Icin, Principal
Pioneer Charter School of Science
51-59 Summer Street
Everett, MA. 01249
Re: Mid-Cycle Report
Dear Principal Icin:
Enclosed is the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education's Mid-cycle Report based on the onsite visit conducted in your district in January 2012. 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 May 15, 2012.
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 Paul J. Aguiar at 781-338-3781.
Sincerely,
Paul J. Aguiar, 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
Dean Paolillo, Supervisor, Program Quality Assurance Services
Murat Kilic, Charter School Board of Trustees Chairperson
Gina Balzano, Local Program Review Coordinator
Encs:Mid-cycle Report
Mid-cycle Progress Report Form
1
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATIONMID-CYCLE REPORT
Pioneer Charter School of Science
Dates of the Mid-cycle Review Onsite: January 10, 2012
Date of this Report: April 27, 2012
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 / / Student Record Review
Interviews
Document
Review / The student record review, interviews and document review verified that one year before the student reaches age 18, the district provides notice to the student and the parent of the rights that will transfer from the parent to the student upon the student’s 18th birthday.
Upon reaching the age of 18, the district obtains consent from the student to continue the student’s special education program in all instances where the student turned eighteen and maintained decision-making authority.
SE 8
IEP Team composition and attendance / / Student Record Review
Interviews
Document
Review / The review of student records, documents and staff interviews indicated that members of the IEP Team attendedIEP Team meetings or the district and the parent agreed, in writing, that the attendance of the Team member was not necessary because the member´s area of the curriculum or related services was not being modified or discussed orthe district and the parent agreed, in writing, to excuse a required Team member´s participation.
When a required Teammember was excused, they provided written input into the development of the IEP to the parent and the IEP team prior to the meeting.
SE 18A
IEP development and content / / Student Record Review
Interviews
Document
Review / The review of student records, documents and staff interviews indicated that whenever the IEP Team evaluation indicated that a student's disability affected social skills development, or when the student's disability made him or her vulnerable to bullying, harassment, or teasing, the IEP addressed the skills and proficiencies needed to avoid and respond to bullying, harassment, or teasing.
Furthermore, for students identified with a disability on the autism spectrum, the IEP Team considered and specifically addressed the skills and proficiencies needed to avoid and respond to bullying, harassment, or teasing.
SE 25
Parental consent / / Student Records
Interviews
Document
Review / The review of student records, documents and staff interviews indicated that when a parent revoked his/her consent to the student´s special education services, the district acted promptly to provide written notice to the parent/guardian 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.
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 1
Assessments are AppropriatelySelected and Interpreted for Students Referred for Evaluation / PI / Student Records
Interviews / The review of student records, documents and staff interviews indicated that not all assessments with signed, parental consent were completed by the charter school; specifically classroom observations and educational assessments (Educational Status Assessments A & B) which contain information concerning the student’s school history and progress in the general curriculum. / The district must complete the missing consented-to assessments for those individual students identified by the Department. Upon completion of the assessments, the district must reconvene the IEP Teams to review the results of the assessments and determine whether the individual student’s current IEP is appropriate.
The district must identify the causes of the noncompliance, i.e. why all the assessments that are on the consent form are not always administered.Upon completion of the analysis, develop a system of monitoring which should includesupervisory oversight and periodic reviews to ensure sustained compliance.
The district must train staff on the procedures for ensuring the selection and completion of assessments. State recommended forms for the Educational Status Assessments A and B can be found at:http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/28mr/.
The charter school should review a sample of initial evaluations and re-evaluations conducted subsequent to the district’s implementation of all corrective actions, to ensure all required and consented-to assessments were completed by the school.
Please note when conducting internal monitoring that school must maintain the following documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of the student names and grade level for the records reviewed; b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the review, their role(s), and signature(s). / For individual students identified by the Department as missing consented-to assessments, provide copies of the assessment summaries, the Meeting Invitation (N-3) as well as either the Notice of Action (N-1) or the Notice of School District Refusal to Act (N-2) as evidence that the IEP Teams reconvened and reviewed the assessment results.
The names of these individual students will be mailed separately to the district to maintain student confidentiality.
Please submit a detailed narrative description of what the district determined was the cause of noncompliance with this criterion and a description of the oversight including the identity of the person(s) responsible for the oversight and the date of the system’s implementation.
Please submit evidence of staff training on assessment procedures (such as the agenda and signed attendance sheet, including role of staff).
Submit all of the above byJune 12, 2012.
Submit a report of the results of theinternal review of student records. Include the following:
- Number of records reviewed;
- Number of records in compliance;
- For all records not in compliance with this criterion, provide the results of a root cause analysis of the non-compliance; and
- Specific corrective actions taken by the district to remedy any non-compliance.
SE 2
Required and Optional Assessments / PI / Student Records
Interviews / See SE 1. / See SE 1. / See SE 1.
SE 3
Determination of specific learning disability / NI / Student Record Review
Interviews / The review of student recordsand staff interviews indicated that when the district identified a student as having a specific learning disability (SLD), the IEP Team did not create a written determination certifying that the student had a SLD. / Please develop procedures regarding the process for the district to make a written determination whether a student has a specific learning disability which is signed by all members of the IEP Team, or if there is disagreement concerning the determination, IEP TEAM members document their disagreement.
Please provide appropriate staff training on the implementation of the Specific Learning Disability (SLD) determination process and forms consistent with the requirements of this criterion. See Special Education
Memorandum on Specific Learning Disability - Eligibility Process/Forms dated December 10, 2007.
http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/iep/sld/for additional guidance and assistance.Please develop a system ofsupervisory oversight and periodic reviews of student records to ensure that IEP Teams complete the required documentation when the student is suspected of having a Specific Learning Disability (SLD).
Please conduct a review of student records for students who currently have or may have a specific learning disability during the determination of eligibility for initial or re-evaluation IEP meetings held subsequent to the district’s implementation of all of the corrective actions.
Please note when conducting internal monitoring that school must maintain the following documentation and make it available to the Department upon request: a) List of the student names and grade level for the records reviewed; b) Date of the review; c) Name of person(s) who conducted the review, their role(s), and signature(s). / Please submit a copy of the procedures developed by the district and evidence of staff training, including an agenda and signed attendance sheets (indicate role of staff).
Please submit a description of the oversight including the identity of the person(s) responsible for the oversight and the date of the system’s implementation.
Submit all of the above byJune 12, 2012.
Submit a report of the results of theinternal review of student records. Include the following:
- Number of records reviewed;
- Number of records in compliance;
- For all records not in compliance with this criterion, provide the results of a root cause analysis of the non-compliance; and
- Specific corrective actions taken by the district to remedy any non-compliance.
SE 9
Timeline for determination of eligibility and provision of documentation to parent / / Student Record Review
Interviews
Document Review / The review of student records, documents and staff interviews indicated that the charter school no longer uses or hasproceduresfora “time line extension form,” which essentially asked parents to allow the school to go beyond the 30-day timeline for assessments, the 45-day timeline for IEP meetings, the annual review date of the IEP, and the 3-year review date. The charter school is meeting the timelines for completing evaluations, holding annual review meetings and re-evaluations.
SE 12
Frequency of re-evaluation / / Student Record Review
Interviews
Document
Review / See SE 9.
SE 14
Review and Revision of IEPs / / Student Record Review
Interviews
Document Review / See SE 9.
SE 22
IEP Implementation and Availability / / Student Records
Interviews
Document Review / The review of student records, documents and staff interviews indicated thatrelated services were no longer removed from incoming students’ consented-to IEPs without first assessing students in those areas and obtaining consent to new IEPs.
SE 24
Notice to Parents Regarding Proposal or Refusal to Initiate or Change the Identification, Evaluation or Educational Placement of the Child or the Provision of the FAPE / / Student Record Review
Interviews
Document Review / The review of student records, documents and staff interviews indicated that the charter school consistently used federally required written notices (N2 notices) to inform parents when the district refused to conduct an assessment or make a finding of no eligibility.
SE 29
Communication is in English and primary language of home / / Student Records
Interviews
Documents / The review of student records, documents and interviews indicated that when the primary language of the parent is other than English, the district always provided written communications in both English and their primary language.
SE 32
Parent advisory council for special education / / Student Records
Interviews
Documents / The review of student records, documents and staff interviews indicated that a workshop on the rights of students and their parents was held by the charter school.
SE 34
Continuum of Alternative Services / / Student Records
Interviews
Documents / See SE 22.
SE 36
IEP Implementa-tion, Accountability and Financial Responsibility / / Student Records
Interviews
Documents / See SE 22.
Pioneer Charter School of Science Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
April 27, 2012
Page 1 of 14
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATIONMID-CYCLE REVIEW
School District: Pioneer Charter School of Science
M I D – CY C L E P R O G R E S S R E P O R T
Date Prepared: ______
Prepared by: ______
(name and title)
Criterion: ______
Topic: ______
For each criterion for which you prepare a progress report, please- make a copy of this cover page,
- fill in the information requested above, and
- attach a complete description of the corrective action taken and any accompanying documentation.
Send the whole set of completed progress reports to:
Darlene Lynch, Director
Program Quality Assurance Services
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
75 Pleasant Street
Malden, MA02148-4906
Rev. 6/30/08