MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION PRIVATE SCHOOL MID-CYCLE REVIEW LIGHTHOUSE SCHOOL DAY PROGRAM MID-CYCLE REVIEW REPORT Previous Program Review Corrective Action Plan Submitted on May 26, 2010 Progress Reports Submitted on September 8, 2010, November 1, 2010, and February 6, 2011 Mid-cycle Onsite Visit Conducted on September 10, 2012 Date of this Report: October 11, 2012 Criterion Number and Topic Implementation Status of Requirements or Corrective Action Plan Determined to be Substantially Method(s) of Verification Comments Regarding Corrective Action Plan Implementation Corrective Action Plan Determined to be Not Fully Implemented or Additional Issues Findings Regarding Incomplete Implementation of Approved Corrective Action Plan or Identification of Additional Issues of Noncompliance Further Corrective Action Ordered by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and Timelines for Implementation and Further Progress Reporting
& 6.4 School Days Per Year 603 CMR 27.05(2); 28.09(9)(a) average minimum of 900 instructional per year as required. Lighthouse School submitted the Learning Time Worksheet regarding the instructional hours and the number of school days per year. Staff interviews confirmed that elementary school students now receive 900 hours of instructional time per year. 8.5 Current IEP & Student Roster 28.09(5)(a) Documentation Interviews Lighthouse School has on file a current IEP for each Massachusetts enrolled student that has been issued by the responsible public school district and consented to and dated by the student’s parent(s) as required or they have provided
evidence/documentation of efforts and/or steps taken for the public school district to obtain signed IEPs. 11.3 Educational Administrator Qualifications 28.09(5)(a); 28.09(7)(a); 603 CMR 44.00 Documentation Records Interviews The assigned Educational Administrator meets the required qualification to serve in this capacity; however, the names and qualifications of the designees of the Educational Administrator who attend IEP Team Meetings were not provided as requested. Lighthouse School has not provided the names and qualifications of staff who attend IEP Team Meetings and serve as designees of the Educational Administrator. By November 13, 2012 Lighthouse School must submit the names and qualifications of all staff who attend IEP Team Meetings and serve as designees for the Educational Administrator. For each name provided, a copy of their Special Education Administrator license or a copy of their license as a Special Education Teacher, proof of a minimum of a Master’s Degree in Special Education or a related field, and a minimum of one year of administrative experience
20 Bullying Prevention and Intervention M.G.L. c. 71, s. 37H, as amended by Chapter 92 of the Acts of 2010. M.G.L. c. 71, s. 37O(e)(1) & (2). M.G.L. c. 71, s. 370(d). Documentation Interviews Lighthouse School has amended its handbook/admission material to include an age-appropriate summary of their new Bullying Prevention Plan and included a description of how it is distributed. The program also submitted a description of the professional development plan developed by the program for all staff and provided evidence of its implementation including dates, format used, and a sign-in sheet indicating staff attendance. Identified Areas of Non- from the 2009-2010 Program Review or Other Areas of Concern 12.1 New Orientation Documentation During the last Program Review, Lighthouse School
U.S.C. 1681; 34 CFR 106.31-106.42; M.G.L. c. 76, § 5; 603 CMR 26.00, esp. 26.07(2, 3) the Review indicated that the required trainings occurred, all staff had participated in the trainings and the trainings are now documented. 15.8 Registering Complaints and Grievances Students and Employees 18.05(1)(b) (16); Title IX: 20 U.S.C. 1681; 34 CFR 106.8; Section 504: 29 U.S.C. 794; 34 Documentation Staff Record Reviews Interviews Documentation review for the last Program Review indicated that while the program had published grievance procedures for employees, these procedures did not provide for prompt and equitable resolution of complaints alleging discrimination based on legally protected categories and the program’s current grievance procedures did not include specific timelines and the appeals process.