School Committee Meeting - Reading Public Schools · 25.09.2017 · 2016-09-22 LAG Board - Committee - Commission - Council: School Committee ... algebra and Math curriculum maps

School Committee Meeting

September 25, 2017

Open Session

7:00 P.M.

Superintendent’s Conference

Room

Town of Reading

Meeting Posting with Agenda

This Agenda has been prepared in advance and represents a listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be discussed

at the meeting. However the agenda does not necessarily include all matters which may be taken up at this meeting.

Page | 1

2016-09-22 LAG

Board - Committee - Commission - Council:

School Committee

Date: 2017-09-25 Time: 7:00 PM

Building: School - Memorial High Location: Superintendent Conference Room

Address: 82 Oakland Road Agenda:

Purpose: Open Session

Meeting Called By: Linda Engelson on behalf of the Chair

Notices and agendas are to be posted 48 hours in advance of the meetings excluding

Saturdays, Sundays and Legal Holidays. Please keep in mind the Town Clerk’s hours of

operation and make necessary arrangements to be sure your posting is made in an

adequate amount of time. A listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be

discussed at the meeting must be on the agenda.

All Meeting Postings must be submitted in typed format; handwritten notices will not be accepted.

Topics of Discussion:

7:00 p.m. A Call to Order

7:05 p.m. B. Public Comment

7:10 – 7:15 p.m. C. Consent Agenda

- Accept a Donation from the RMHS PTO

- Accept a Donation to the Wood End School

- Approval of RMHS Model United Nations Field Trips

- Approval of Parker French Field Trip

- Approval of Minutes (September 11, 2017)

7:15 – 7:45 p.m. D. Reports

1. Students

2. Liaison/Sub-Committee

3. Superintendent

4. Assistant Superintendent

5. Director of Student Services

6. Director of Finance

E. Old Business

1.

7:45 – 8:30 p.m.

F. New Business

1. Special Education Update

Town of Reading

Meeting Posting with Agenda

This Agenda has been prepared in advance and represents a listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be discussed

at the meeting. However the agenda does not necessarily include all matters which may be taken up at this meeting.

Page | 2

G. Information/Correspondence

1. Email from Rebecca Liberman – Access to middle school

algebra and Math curriculum maps.

2. Email from Marianne Downing - school committee letter

on science spending with answers final.docx - assuming

you are OK with attached, this can go to BOS (changes

accepted).

3. Email from Lori Conway - OCR Investigation

4. Email from Lauren Bennett - SC meeting

5. RPS 1st Annual Parent University Flyer

6. FY18 Capital Plan Update

7. Statement from parent Alicia Williams

8. Statement on behalf of parents with dyslexia read by

Lauren Bennett

H. Routine Matters

1. Bills & Payroll Warrants

2. Calendar

I. Future Business

9:15 p.m. J. Adjourn

L. Executive Session

Reading Public Schools

Instilling a joy of learning and inspiring the innovative leaders of tomorrow

The Reading Public Schools does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, gender identity, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, age or disability.

John F. Doherty, Ed. D. Superintendent of Schools

82 Oakland Road Reading, MA 01867

Phone: 781-944-5800 Fax: 781-942-9149

Craig Martin, M.Ed. Assistant Superintendent

Carolyn J. Wilson, M.Ed., JD Director of Student Services

Gail Dowd, CPA Director of Finance

TO: Reading School Committee

FROM: John F. Doherty, Ed.D.

Superintendent of Schools

DATE: September 21, 2017

TOPIC: Accept a Donation from RMHS PTO

At our meeting on Monday evening, I will ask the School Committee to accept a donation from the

RMHS PTO in the amount of $266.66. This donation is being used to cover the balance of the cost of

laptop computers.

If you have any questions, please contact me.






Phone: 781-944-5800 Fax: 781-942-9149








TOPIC: Accept a Donation from the Wood End PTO

At our meeting on Monday evening, I will ask the School Committee to accept a donation from the Wood

End PTO in the amount of $900.18. This donation is being used to purchase library books for the Media

Center.







Phone: 781-944-5800 Fax: 781-942-9149








TOPIC: Approval of RMHS Model United Nations Field Trips

At our meeting on Monday evening I will ask the School Committee to approve the RMHS Model UN

field trips to Harvard University in January, Boston University in February, and New York City in March

2018. I have met with teacher Amy Fedele to discuss these trips. These trips are an opportunity for

delegates to come together into an environment that fosters creative thinking and open-mindedness in

debate.







Phone: 781-944-5800 Fax: 781-942-9149








TOPIC: Approval of Parker Grade 8 Field Trip to Quebec

At our meeting on Monday evening I will ask the School Committee to approve the annual Parker 8th

Grade field trip to Quebec in April. I have met with Principal Shankland and teacher Steve Olivo to

discuss this trip. This trip will include an opportunity for students to experience a diversity

of curricular and cultural activities that complement the middle school curriculum.

I have attached a memorandum from Principal Shankland for your information.


Town of Reading Meeting Minutes

Page | 1

2016-09-22 LAG

Board - Committee - Commission - Council:

School Committee

Date: 2017-09-11 Time: 7:00 PM

Building: School - Memorial High Location: Superintendent Conference Room

Address: 82 Oakland Road Session: Open Session

Purpose: Open Session Version: Draft

Attendees: Members - Present:

Gary Nihan, Chuck Robinson, Nick Boivin, Linda Snow Dockser, Jeanne

Borawski, and Elaine Webb

Members - Not Present:

Others Present:

Superintendent John Doherty, Director of Finance Gail Dowd, Assistant

Superintendent Craig Martin, Student Representatives Mario Cutone & Catie

Comounduros, Chronicle Reporter Al Sylvia,Coolidge Assistant Principal Bree

Karow

Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Linda Engelson on behalf of the Chair

Topics of Discussion:

I. Call to Order

Chair Robinson called the School Committee to order at 7:00 p.m. and reviewed the

agenda.

II. Recommended Procedure

A. Public Comment

Rebecca Liberman asked about a math curriculum update. Dr. Doherty said no

date has been set at this point.

B. Consent Agenda

Mrs. Webb asked if anyone would like to remove any item from the consent

agenda. The donation of the clock was removed to be accepted separately.

Donation of Clock

Mr. Joe Cain provided the background of the clock that was being donated to the

district. In 1935 The Reading School Committee bought a state of the art clock

and bell system for Reading High School, then located on Sanborn Street. It was

manufactured by the International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) and

Page | 2

consisted of a programmable oak master clock in the Principal’s Office with

synchronized wall clocks in every classroom. Following the high school’s move

to Oakland Road in 1954, the building was used as a Community Center or

shuttered until it was sold to developers in1988. Prior to the sale, members of the

School Department and the Reading Historical Commission toured the building to

determine if there were any items that might be worth retaining. This clock was

one of the artifacts that were removed prior to turning over the building.

In 1990, a battery powered quartz movement replaced the antique clock

mechanism and Stephen Trites of Furniture Restoration of Reading donated the

refinishing of the clock case. The clock hung in the RMHS Media Center until the

most recent renovation; since then, the clock has not really had much of a home.

We’re pleased to finally have it in a place where it can be enjoyed as a beautiful

piece of craftsmanship, a technological curiosity of its time and an interesting

piece of Reading history.

Mrs. Webb moved, seconded by Dr. Nihan, to accept the donation of a clock

to be hung in the Central Office. The motion carried 6-0.

Consent Agenda

- Accept a Donation to RMHS Volleyball

- Approval of Coolidge Field Trip - Quebec

- Approval of Minutes (August 28, 2017)

Mrs. Webb moved, seconded by Mr. Boivin, to approve the consent agenda

as amended. The motion carried 6-0.

C. Reports

Student Representative

Ms. Comounduras reported that the football team won their first game.

Mr. Cutone reported that Back to School Night is Wednesday.

Liaison’s Report

Dr. Nihan reported that RCASA is celebrating Recovery month.

Mrs. Webb followed up sharing the line-up of events that will occur during

Recovery month.

Dr. Snow Dockser shared that the SEPAC is meeting on Thursday night at 7:00

p.m. in the Superintendent’s Conference Room.

The HRAC did not have a quorum at the last meeting and the Board of Selectmen

delayed the decision on the sun-setting of the group until December 1st. Dr.

Snow Dockser also announced that she has resigned from HRAC and that her

resignation letter was public record and should be included in an upcoming

Selectmen’s Packet.

Page | 3

Dr. Snow Dockser reported that the Reading Embraces Diversity Working Group

is currently planning their Kick Off Event in response to the increased

manifestations of anti-Semitism and Hate in our community and the nation and

world. The Kick Off will take place on October 3rd at 7 in the William Endslow

Performing Arts Center at RMHS.

Mrs. Borawski shared information from a community member regarding a

Reading Public Schools employee that went above and beyond the call of duty.

Assistant Superintendent

Mr. Martin reported on the recent professional development that has occurred

relating to the district goals. All of the kindergarten teachers attended a writer’s

workshop. He did state that the timing of the training was not the best but we had

an opportunity to secure a quality trainer for the sessions. The feedback from the

teachers was positive.

Director of Finance

Mrs. Dowd reviewed two memos in the packet addressing concerns of the

committee at the last meeting. The first memo, which was included in the June

19th packet outlined adjustments made to the FY18 budget due to the difference in

funding between the School Committee approved and final Town Meeting

budget. She also said that she will provide detailed information during the

quarterly updates. The second memo outlined how the $150,000 for the science

curriculum implementation was used and reminded the committee that the funds

were approved during the April Town Meeting and are out of the FY17 budget.

Superintendent’s Report

Superintendent Doherty took a moment to introduce Brienne Karow, Coolidge

Assistant Principal. Ms. Karow provided a brief background.

The Fall Street Faire was a great success and Dr. Doherty thanked all the

volunteers and business/vendors that played a part in the success. There were a

great number school groups and organizations that participated this year.

Dr. Snow Dockser wanted to thank the RMHS Student Liaisons to the HRAC for

volunteering at the HRAC Booth at the Faire: Joshua Liberman and Tali Schoerr.

The elementary schools held their back to school nights last week, Wednesday

will be the high school and RISE @ RMHS and the middle schools will be on

September 27th.

D. Old Business

Second Reading and Acceptance of Policy IMDA – Accommodations for

Religious and Ethnic Observances

Mrs. Webb moved, seconded by Mrs. Borawski, to accept the second reading

of revised policy IMDA – Accommodations for Religious and Ethnic

Observances.

Page | 4

Mrs. Webb began the second reading.

Mr. Boivin moved, seconded by Dr. Nihan, to dispense of the further reading

of Policy IMDA. The motion carried 6-0.

Dr. Doherty reviewed the revised policy. He thanked those that participated on

the committee.

Mr. Boivin thanked the Superintendent for capturing the committee suggestions in

this policy. He had a concern with the continuity between the policy and the

implementation regulations. He would like to add a statement to the regulation

under section III clarifying how the parent would handle calling in their child’s

absence.

Mr. Boivin moved, seconded by Dr. Nihan, that the following be added to

Section III of the Accommodation Regulation – “notification to the school

will be in accordance with the normal process in reporting a student

absence”. The motion carried 6-0.

The original motion carried 6-0.

E. New Business

FY19 Budget – Guiding Principles

Chair Robinson shared that in previous years the guiding principles were

proposed and discussed at the meeting. This year, the guiding principles have

been submitted to the Superintendent and feels that there is no need for further

discussion. The Superintendent and Director of Finance have them to use as they

begin the budget process.

Mr. Boivin would like to see a document that outlines how the guiding principles

will be used to develop the budget.

III. Routine Matters

a. Bills and Payroll (A)

Warrant S1809 8.31.17 $146,350.94

Warrant S1810 9.7.17 $184,755.88

b. Calendar

IV. Information/Correspondence

V. Future Business

VI. Adjournment

Page | 5

Adjourn

Chair Robinson declared that executive session was necessary to protect the

board’s bargaining position.

Mrs. Webb moved, seconded by Mrs. Borawski, to enter executive session to

discuss strategies with respect to collective bargaining and not to return to

open session. The roll call vote carried 6 – 0. Dr. Nihan, Dr. Snow Dockser,

Mr. Robinson, Mr. Boivin, Mrs. Borawski, and Mrs. Webb.

The meeting adjourned at 7.50 p.m.

NOTE: The minutes reflect the order as stated in the posted meeting agenda not

the order they occurred during the meeting.






Phone: 781-944-5800 Fax: 781-942-9149








TOPIC: Special Education Presentation

At our meeting on Monday evening, Mrs. Wilson will update the School Committee on special

education, the mid-cycle review as part of the Coordinated Program Review and a ruling from the Office

of Civil Rights.


Carolyn Wilson, Director of Student Services

Special Education UpdateSeptember 25, 2017

Topics to Review

▪ Massachusetts Department of Education: Mid-Cycle Review Findings and Corrective Action

▪ U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR) Letter of Finding and Resolution Agreement

Findings and Corrective Action

Massachusetts Department of Education: Mid-Cycle Review

The Mid-cycle Review Process

▪ Rescheduled 3 times by DESE

▪ On Site dates were 4/25/17 and 4/26/17

▪ Focus on areas that were found non-compliant in Coordinated Program Review

▪ The District completed a self assessment which included record reviews for 6 student records and document review

▪ The Department requested a review of 17 additional records when they came on site.

▪ The Department interviewed 1 special education teacher, 1 Team Chair and the Director of Student Services

SE 9: Timeline for Determination of eligibility and provisions of the documentation to parentsFinding: Partially Implemented

SE 9 Timeline for determination of eligibility and provision of documentation to parentWithin 45 school working days after receipt of the parent's written consent to an initial evaluation or a re-evaluation, the school district determines whether the student is eligible for special education and provides to the parent either a proposed IEP and (except in cases covered by 603 CMR 28.06(2)(e)) proposed placement or a written explanation of the finding of no eligibility.

State Requirements Federal Requirements 603 CMR 28.05(1); 28.06(2)(e)

SE 9 is related to State Performance Plan Indicator 11.(See http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/spp/.)

http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/spp/

SE 9: Finding and Corrective Action

▪ Finding: The IEP or finding of no eligibility is not consistently provided to parents within 45 school working days of receiving the signed evaluation consent form from the parent.

▪ Corrective Action:

– Internal record review to ensure compliance with the timelines

▪ IEP software allows us to pull reports

– Training of all staff

▪ Reviewed with principals, team chairs and special education staff

▪ Submission of agendas and sign-in sheets

SE 13- Progress Report and ContentFindings: Partially Implemented

Progress Reports and content

Parents receive reports on the student's progress towards reaching the goals set in the IEP at least as often as parents are informed of the progress of non-disabled students.

Progress report information sent to parents includes written information on the student’s progress towards the annual goals in the IEP.

Where a student’s eligibility terminates because the student has graduated from secondary school or exceeded the age of eligibility, the school district provides the student with a summary of his or her academic achievement and functional performance, including recommendations on how to assist the student in meeting his or her postsecondary goals.

State Requirements Federal Requirements

603 CMR 28.07(3) 34 CFR 300.305(e)(3); 300.320(a)(3)

See optional summary of academic achievement form at www.doe.mass.edu/sped/IDEA2004/spr_meetings/eval_exitsummary.doc.

http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/IDEA2004/spr_meetings/eval_exitsummary.doc

SE 13: Finding and Corrective ActionFinding: Partially Implemented

▪ Finding: When a students eligibility terminates because the student has graduated or has exceeded the age of eligibility the district does not consistently provide the student with a summary of his or her academic performance.


– Internal record review to ensure compliance to ensure summaries are complete


▪ Reviewed with High School principals and Assistant Principals and all Team Chairs

▪ High School Special Education Staff will be receiving more in-depth training

SE 14: Review and Revisions of IEPFindings: Implemented

Review and revision of IEPs

At least annually, on or before the anniversary date of the IEP, a Team meeting is held to consider the student’s progress and to review, revise, or develop a new IEP or refer the student for a re-evaluation, as appropriate.

The IEP Team reviews and revises the IEP to address any lack of expected progress towards the annual goals and in the general curriculum.

Amendments to the IEP. Between annual IEP meetings, the district and parent may agree to make changes to a student’s IEP, documented in writing, without convening a meeting of the Team. Upon request, a parent is provided with a revised copy of the IEP with the amendments incorporated.


603 CMR 28.04(3) 34 CFR 300.324(a)(4), (6) and (b)

SE 14: Review and Revision of IEPSFinding: Implemented

▪ A review of student records indicated that at least annually, on or before the anniversary date of the IEP, a Team meeting is held to consider the student’s progress and to review, revise or develop a new IEP or to refer the student for a re-evaluation, as appropriate. Staff interviews indicated that IEP Teams consistently review and revise IEPs to address any lack of expected student progress towards annual goals and in the general curriculum.

▪ Record reviews and staff interviews indicated that of the district and parent agree to make changes to a student’s IEP between annual meetings, the Team reconvened to amend the IEP. Parents are advised that they may request a complete copy of the amended IEP.

SE 18 A: IEP Development and ContentFinding: Implemented

IEP development and content 1. Upon determining that the student is eligible for special education, the Team, including the

parent(s), develops an IEP at the Team meeting. 2. The IEP is completed addressing all elements of the most current IEP format provided by the

Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. 3. The school district ensures that the IEP will not be changed outside of the Team meeting. 4. For students identified with a disability on the autism spectrum , or 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 must address the skills and proficiencies needed to avoid and respond to bullying, harassment, or teasing.

State Requirements Federal Requirements603 CMR 28.05(3) IDEA-97: 34 CFR Part 300, Appendix A, Question #22

In connection with parts 4 and 5, see the Technical Assistance Advisory SPED 2011-2: Bullying Prevention and Intervention at http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/advisories/11_2ta.html.

http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/advisories/11_2ta.html

http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/advisories/11_2ta.html

SE 18A: IEP Development and ContentFinding: Implemented

▪ A review of student records and staff interviews indicated that upon determining that the student is eligible for special education, IEP teams develop the IEP, addressing all elements of the current IEP format provided by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.

▪ A review of student records, document and staff interviews also indicated that IEP Teams specifically address the skills and proficiencies needed to avoid and respond to bullying, harassment, or teasing for students whose disability affects social skills development, when the student’s disability makes him or her vulnerable to bullying, harassment or teasing, and for students identified with a disability on the autism spectrum. Record reviews indicate that IEP Teams document their considerations of the skills and proficiencies needed by students in the district’s Notice of Proposed School District Action (n1s), as well as in the Present Levels of Educational Performance (PLEP) B and the Additional Information sections of the IEPs.

SE 18B: Determination of placement; provision of IEP to ParentFinding: Partially Implemented

Determination of placement; provision of IEP to parent 1. At the Team meeting, after the IEP has been fully developed, the Team determines the appropriate placement to deliver

the services on the student’s IEP.2. Unless the student’s IEP requires some other arrangement, the student is educated in the school that he or she would

attend if the student did not require special education.3. The decision regarding placement is based on the IEP, including the types of related services that are to be provided to

the student, the type of settings in which those services are to be provided, the types of service providers, and the location at which the services are to be provided.

4. Reserved.5. Immediately following the development of the IEP, the district provides the parent with two (2) copies of the proposed IEP

and proposed placement along with the required notice, except that the proposal of placement may be delayed according to the provisions of 603 CMR 28.06(2)(e) in a limited number of cases.

State Requirements Federal Requirements 603 CMR 28.05(6) and (7); 28.06(2) 34 CFR 300.116; 300.325

In connection with part 5, see Memorandum on the Implementation of 603 CMR 28.05(7): Parent response to proposed IEP and proposed placement at http://www.doe.mass.edu/news/news.aspx?id=3182.

http://www.doe.mass.edu/news/news.aspx?id=3182

SE 18B: Finding and Corrective ActionFinding: Partially Implemented

▪ Finding: Records demonstrated that although the District provides 2 copies of the proposed IEP and placement, they are not consistently sent to parents within 2 calendar weeks.


– Internal record review to ensure compliance with the timelines

▪ IEP software allows us to pull reports




SE 20: Least Restrictive Program SelectedFinding: Implemented

Least restrictive program selected

The program selected is the least restrictive environment for students, with consideration given to any potential harmful effect on the student or on the quality of services that he or she needs.

If the student is removed from the general education classroom at any time, the Team states why the removal is considered critical to the student’s program and the basis for its conclusion that education of the student in a less restrictive environment, with the use of supplementary aids and services, could not be achieved satisfactorily.

The district does not remove an eligible student from the general education classroom solely because of needed modification in the curriculum.

If a student’s IEP necessitates special education services in a day or residential facility or an out-of-district educational collaborative program, the IEP Team considers whether the student requires special education services and support to promote the student’s transition to placement in a less restrictive program.


M.G.L. c. 71B, s. 3 34 CFR 300.114 – 120

603 CMR 28.06(2) 34 CFR 300.42

SE 22: IEP Implementation and availabilityFinding: Partially Implemented

IEP implementation and availability1. Where the IEP of the student in need of special education has been accepted in whole or in part by that student's parent, the school

district provides the mutually agreed upon services without delay.2. At the beginning of each school year, the district has an IEP in effect for each eligible student within its jurisdiction.3. Each teacher and provider described in the IEP is informed of his or her 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 under it.4. The school district does not delay implementation of the IEP due to lack of classroom space or personnel, provides as many of the

services on the accepted IEP as possible and immediately informs parents in writing of any delayed services, reasons for delay, actions that the school district is taking to address the lack of space or personnel and offers alternative methods to meet the goals on the accepted IEP. Upon agreement of the parents, the school district implements alternative methods immediately until the lack of space or personnel issues are resolved.

State Requirements Federal Requirements 603 CMR 28.05(7)(b); 28.06(2)(d)(2) 34 CFR 300.323

SE 22 is related to State Performance Plan Indicator 3.(See http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/spp/.)


SE 22: Finding and Corrective ActionFinding: Partially Implemented

▪ Finding: The District does not immediately notify parents of a delay in providing services due to personnel or space. The District offers a sole method, rather than alternative methods that convey the most benefit for the individual student to meet the goals.


– Develop an internal tracking system to ensure parents are immediately notified if there is a delay in implementing IEP services.

– Review of Student Records




SE 26: Parent Participation in MeetingsFinding: Implemented

Parent participation in meetings

The district ensures that one or both parents of a student are members of any group that makes decisions on the educational placement of their student.

The administrator of special education notifies parent(s) in writing of any Team meeting early enough to ensure that they have an opportunity to attend.

The district schedules the meeting at a mutually agreed upon time and place and documents such efforts.

If neither parent can attend, the district uses other methods to ensure parent participation, including individual or conference telephone calls, or video conferencing.

In cases where the district, after reasonable efforts, is unable to obtain the parents’ participation in Team meeting discussions and decisions, the district conducts the Team meeting and documents its attempts to facilitate the parents’ participation.


603 CMR 28.02(21) 34 CFR 300.322; 300.501

SE 26 is related to State Performance Plan Indicator 8.

(See http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/spp/.)


SE 37: Procedures for Approved and Unapproved Out of District PlacementFinding: Partially Implemented

Procedures for approved and unapproved out-of-district placements

1. Individual student program oversight: The school district monitors the provision of services to and the programs of individual students

placed in public and private out-of-district programs. Documentation of monitoring plans and all actual monitoring are placed in the

files of every eligible student who has been placed out-of-district. To the extent that this monitoring requires site visits, such site visits

are documented and placed in the students’ files for review. The duty to monitor out-of-district placements is not delegated to parents or

their agents, to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, or to the out-of-district program.

2. Student right to full procedural protections: The school district retains full responsibility for ensuring that the student is receiving all

special education and related services in the student's IEP, as well as all procedural protections of law and regulation. Any Team

meetings conducted during the time that a student is enrolled in the out-of-district program are initiated by the school district in

coordination with the out-of-district program.

3. Preference to approved programs: The school district, in all circumstances, first seeks to place a student in a program approved by the

Department pursuant to the requirements of 603 CMR 28.09. Preference is given to approved programs located within the

Commonwealth of Massachusetts if the choice of such program is consistent with the needs of the student and the choice of such

program complies with LRE requirements. When an approved program is available to provide the services on the IEP, the district makes

such placement in the approved program in preference to any program not approved by the Department.

SE 37: Procedures for Approved and Unapproved Out of District PlacementFinding: Partially Implemented (continued)

1. Written contracts: The school district enters into written contracts with all public and private out-of-district placements. At a minimum,

such contracts meet the content requirements of 603 CMR 28.06(3)(f)(1-5), and specifically include a statement that the district shall not

contract with any out-of-district placement that discriminates on the grounds of race, color, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity or

national origin, or that discriminates against qualified persons with disabilities.

2. Use of unapproved programs: A school district that places a student in a program that has not been approved by the Department

according to the requirements under 603 CMR 28.09 ensures that such programs and services are provided in appropriate settings by

appropriately credentialed staff able to deliver the services on the student’s IEP. Students placed by the school district in such programs

are entitled to the full protections of state and federal special education law and regulation.

3. Placement documentation: The following documentation is maintained by the school district pursuant to its placement of students in

unapproved out-of-district programs:

a. Search: The administrator of special education documents the search for and unavailability of a program approved by the

Department. The administrator places such documentation in the student record.

b. Evaluation of facility: The administrator of special education or his/her designee thoroughly evaluates the appropriateness of any

unapproved facility prior to placement of the student in such program. Such evaluation determines whether the unapproved

facility can appropriately implement the student’s IEP in a safe and educationally appropriate environment. Such evaluation

determines whether the unapproved facility can and will provide the student with all the rights that are accorded to the student

under state and federal special education law. Such evaluation is documented in detail and placed in the student record for review.

To the extent that this evaluation requires a site visit, such site visits are documented and placed in the student record for review.

The duty to evaluate the appropriateness of any unapproved facility is not delegated to the parents or their agents or the proposed

unapproved facility.

SE 37: Procedures for Approved and Unapproved Out of District PlacementFinding: Partially Implemented (continue)

a. School district approval to operate a private school in Massachusetts: If services in an unapproved program are provided in a

school setting, the administrator of special education ensures that such school has received approval from the school committee

where the private school is located under M.G.L. c.76, §1 and a copy of such approval is retained in the student record.

b. Pricing: Pursuant to the requirements for Compliance, Reporting, and Auditing for Human and Social Services at 808 CMR 1.00,

the administrator obtains pricing forms required to set program prices for programs receiving publicly-funded students. Such

pricing forms are completed by the proposed placement and document that the price proposed for the student’s tuition is the

lowest price charged for similar services to any student in that program.

c. Notification of the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education: Prior to placement, if the Team determines that

placement in such facility is appropriate, the administrator notifies the Department of the intent to place the student and the name

and location of the proposed placement before placing the student into the program by sending a completed mandated 28M3 form

titled “Notice of Intent to Seek Approval for Individual Student Program” and all the required supporting documentation (i.e.,

completed pricing forms, signed written contract that will govern such placement, and monitoring plan pursuant to 603 CMR

28.06(3)(b)). The district maintains copies of this documentation, as well as any documentation of the Department’s objections to

such placement and the steps the district has taken in regard to such objection. The district maintains documentation of the

approved price for publicly-funded students as set by the state agency responsible for setting program prices. The district

maintains documentation of actual monitoring of the unapproved placement, including any site visits made and other monitoring

activities undertaken by the school district.

d. Out of state programs: If out-of-district programs are provided in a placement outside of Massachusetts, and such school has not

received approval by the Department under 603 CMR 28.09, the administrator of special education ensures that such school has

received approval from the host state.

SE 37 Finding and Corrective ActionFinding: Partially Implemented

▪ Finding: A review of student records and staff interviews indicated that the district does not consistently monitor the provisions of services to and the programs of individual students placed in public and private out-of-district programs


– Develop a procedure for monitoring students in out of district placements including a monitoring plan.

– Internal oversight and tracking system.

– Review of Student Records




Questions

Review of Complaint from the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights

The Office for Civil Rights

▪ The Office for Civil Rights enforces several Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance from the Department of Education.

▪ A complaint of discrimination can be filed by anyone who believes that an education institution that receives Federal financial assistance has discriminated against someone on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, or age. The person or organization filing the complaint need not be a victim of the alleged discrimination, but may complain on behalf of another person or group.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/complaintintro.html

The Office for Civil RightsOCR enforces the following laws:

• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin;

• Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex;

• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability;

• Age Discrimination Act of 1975, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of age;

• Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability;

• Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act, part of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which prohibits denial of access to or other discrimination against the Boy Scouts or other Title 36 U.S.C. youth groups in public elementary schools, public secondary schools, local education agencies, and state education agencies that have a designated open forum or limited public forum.

Options for Resolution

▪ If there is clear indication that the recipient failed to comply with one of the civil rights laws that OCR enforces, OCR will contact the recipient and attempt to negotiate a voluntary resolution agreement.

▪ Early Complaint Resolution allows the parties (the complainant and the institution which is the subject of the complaint) an opportunity to resolve the complaint allegations quickly; generally, soon after the complaint has been opened for investigation.

▪ Resolution of the complaint before the conclusion of the investigation, if the recipient expresses an interest in resolving the complaint.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/complaints-how.html

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/complaints-how.html

OCR Data

The following Districts had Disability based Resolution Agreements:

▪ 2017: Hingham, Dartmouth

▪ 2016: Manchester Essex, Marshfield

▪ 2015: Andover, Maynard, Norwell

2016 Report to the President and Secretary of Education

▪ Massachusetts had 13 Disability based complaints that were resolved with agreements. 1 Title VI complaint resolved with an agreement.

▪ https://www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/ocr/report-to-president-and-secretary-of-education-2016.pdf

https://www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/ocr/report-to-president-and-secretary-of-education-2016.pdf

Timeline for the Complaint

▪ Complaint received by the District on June 9, 2016

▪ Documents submitted to OCR on July 8, 2016: including, but not limited to student rosters, student IEPs, teacher schedules.

▪ One on site day with the OCR attorney investigating the case to interview and see classroom space.

▪ Additional follow up phone interviews with OCR attorney.

▪ Additional documentation produced for OCR as requested during the 2016-2017 School Year.

▪ Letter of Finding and Resolution Agreement received August 31, 2017.

Allegations in Complaint

▪ Allegation 1: The Classroom Space Used by the Bridge Program Students.

▪ Allegation 2(a): The Implementation of Student A’s IEPs

▪ Allegation 2 (b): The Implementation of Student B’s IEP

Bridge Program Classroom: Timeline▪ January, 2011:Superintendent of Schools notifies School Committee of elementary classroom and educational space concerns

▪ May 2012: Locker Study Completed identifying elementary space needs in Reading-making key recommendations.

▪ Spring and Summer, 2013: Space options reviewed including possible purchase of St. Agnes School

▪ Fall, 2013: Early Childhood Center Working Group Formed to Review Space Needs

▪ February 2014: MA DESE was on site for the coordinated Program Review- No Citations regarding the shared space at Joshua Eaton or concerns about other schools.

▪ February 2014: Town Meeting does not support request for feasibility study for Early Childhood Center

▪ Spring 2015: Walker Associates completed Program Evaluation and made recommendations regarding space.

Bridge Program Classroom Timeline (cont.)▪ April 2015: Six Modular Classrooms Approved by Town Meeting

▪ July 2015: New Principal in Place at Joshua Eaton

▪ October2015: Two Modular Classrooms Arrive at Joshua Eaton allowing Kindergarten students to move out of the gym and into classroom space.

▪ September 2015- February 2016: Discussions between Director of Student Services, Building Principal, Superintendent regarding space options for special education programs at Joshua Eaton

▪ Spring 2016: Classroom Spaces Identified for the Bridge Classrooms for the 16-17 School Year.

▪ August 2016: The Bridge 2/3 and 4/5 classrooms have dedicated space at Joshua Eaton.

OCR Findings on Bridge Classroom Space for 2014-2015 and 2015-2016

▪ Section 504 Regulation (34 C.F.R. § 104.4 and Title II regulation, at 28 C.F.R. § 35.130 (a) “…no qualified individual with a disability shall be excluded from participation in, denied the benefit of, or otherwise subjected to discrimination under the District’s programs or activities on the basis of disability.”

▪ Classroom Size: Comparable in square footage. (p. 3)

▪ Access to hallway: Lack of direct access to the hallway was a negative feature of the Bridge program Classroom Space. (p. 4)

▪ Classroom Noise: “The noise inherent when two educational programs involving small children with disabilities share a space was a negative feature of the Bridge Program Classroom Space.” (p.5)

OCR Findings on Bridge Classroom Space for 2014-2015 and 2015-2016

▪ Privacy: “…the classroom structure was a negative feature of the Bridge Program classroom space which compromised the privacy of the Bridge Program students.” (p.5)

▪ Conclusions: “OCR found that the students in the Bridge Program Classes were more likely than not adversely impacted by their shared classroom set up.” (p. 5). Inferior to other rooms because of lack of direct access to the hallway, no door, noise and privacy.

Implementation of IEPs for Student A and B

▪ Multi-Sensory Instruction (p. 7, 8, 12 and 13): “…OCR found insufficient evidence to suggest the District failed to implement the multi-sensory instruction provisions of the Student A’s (and B’s) IEP.”

▪ Quiet and Non-Distracting Learning Environment (p. 9, 15): “…the District more likely than not failed to fully implement the provisions of student A’s (and B’s) IEPs related to providing a non-distracting learning environment…”

▪ Movement Breaks (p.10, 16): “…OCR found insufficient evidence to suggest the District failed to implement the provisions of Student A’s (and Student B’s) IEPs related to movement breaks.”

Student A: Structured Reading Services

▪ P. 8-9

▪ Start of the school year through October 13, 2015: “…insufficient evidence to suggest that the district failed to implement the structured reading provision…”

▪ October 14, 2015 through the end of the 2015-2016 school year- “The District did not take steps to ensure that it faithfully implemented the structured reading services in Student A’s IEPs after the implementation of the October Schedule on October 14, 2015.”

Conclusions regarding Student A (p.10-11)

▪ OCR found the district failed to properly implement 2 provisions of the Student’s IEP.

– Structured reading with a special education teacher

– “should be seated in the most distraction free location in the classroom when possible.”

▪ “…OCR determined that it was more likely than not that Student A’s progress was negatively affected….the District’s failure to implement these aspects of Student A’s IEPs rose to the level of a denial of FAPE.”

Student B: Additional Allegations

▪ Lexia during the School Day (p. 13): The IEP in effect from January 2016 through May 2016 prohibited the use of Lexiaand the Special Education Teacher and Paraprofessional were using this program.

▪ Structured Reading Services (p.13 and 14):

– Insufficient evidence to show the District failed to implement the reading services from January 2016 to May 24, 2016.

– “…the District failed to implement the structured reading provisions in Student B’s 2016 IEP from May 25, 2016 through the end of the 2015-2016 academic year.”

Student B: Additional Allegations

▪ Work Locations and positions (p. 16): “…OCR found there was insufficient evidence to suggest that the District failed to implement the provisions in Student B’s IEP related to allowing him to use a variety of work locations and/or positions.”

Conclusions Regarding Student B

▪ OCR found the district failed to properly implement 3 provisions of the Student’s IEP.

– The prohibition on Lexia

– Structured reading with a special education teacher May 25 through the end of the school year- June 21, 2016

– “decrease environmental and visual distractions, when possible.”

▪ “…OCR determined that it was more likely than not that Student B’s progress was negatively affected….the District’s failure to implement these aspects of Student A’s IEPs rose to the level of a denial of FAPE.”

Resolution Agreement

▪ Commits the District to take specific steps to address the areas of non-compliance.

▪ OCR will monitor the District.

▪ The OCR investigation has concluded.

▪ This letter represents the conclusions of this individual case. (see p. 17)

▪ The District has begun the implementation of the Resolution Agreement.

Action Steps by the District

▪ Summer 2015: District began consultation work with landmark School. Teachers attended training offered through landmark Outreach..

▪ September 2015: Vertical Professional Learning Communities began to allow the Special Education Teachers in the Bridge program to work Collaboratively on a monthly basis.

▪ October 2015: Modular classrooms were added to Joshua Eaton which allowed for more classroom space in the school.

▪ October 2016: Hired a full time Team Chair for Joshua Eaton to Monitor implementation and compliance.

▪ November 2016: New Team Chair and Director of Student Services reviewed all service delivery grids and teacher schedules.

▪ January 2017: Hired an additional special education teacher for Joshua Eaton to ensure all services can continue to be implemented.

▪ September 2017: New Joshua Eaton Principal has reviewed all IEPs and service delivery for the students in the Bridge program

▪ September 2017: Bridge Classroom for 4/5 students- new rug installed./

▪ October 2017: Team Chair and Director of Student Services will review IEPs and teacher schedules.

Questions




September 14, 2017

Dear Parent or Guardian,

As a result of a recent finding of the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), the District is offering

compensatory services from a licensed special education teacher for your child. During the 2014-

2015 and 2015-2016 school year the Bridge program (LLD program) shared a space with the

Learning Center at Joshua Eaton. As a result of the investigation, the Reading Public Schools

agreed to offer compensatory services to students to remedy any effects of any different treatment

those students may have experienced due to the shared space.

If your child was enrolled in the Bridge program for both the 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 school

years you are eligible to receive 30 hours of compensatory services. If your child was just enrolled

in the program for 1 of the 2 years your child is eligible for 15 hours of compensatory services.

There are 2 potential options for accessing these services—each option will be offered at the

elementary level and the middle school level.

Option 1:

Staring December 4, 2017, the District will offer three 1- hour sessions of services after school on

Monday, Tuesday and Thursday each week. For those students accessing 15 hours this will end on

Thursday January 18 and will be provided by a licensed special educator. For those students

accessing 30 hours this session will end on February 22, 2018. These sessions will consist of

services in the areas of structured reading, reading and/or math depending upon your selection.

Option 2:

Starting July 9, 2018 and running through August 9, 2018 the District will offer either 3 hours per

week of services or 6 hours per week of services depending on your child’s individual situation.

These services will be provided by a licensed special education teacher and will take place at the

completion of ESY programming each day. These sessions will consist of services in the areas of

structured reading, reading and/or math depending upon your selection.



Phone: 781-944-5800 Fax: 781-942-9149





If neither of these options work for you please contact my office directly and we can discuss other

options of providing compensatory services, including provision of services in the District or other

mutually agreeable location. Please note that these services, if accepted, will be in addition to the

services your child currently receives through his or her last accepted IEP.

Attached to this letter you will find a sheet that needs to be completed and returned by October 13,

2017. The District will then contact you with the schedule and the staff names for Option 1 so you

can plan accordingly by October 27, 2017. If you choose Option 2 the District will provide you

with a schedule and the staff names by May 15, 2018.

Please contact me if you have further questions.

Sincerely,

Carolyn J. Wilson, M. Ed., JD

Director of Student Services

CC: Building Principal

Team Chair

Student Record


Compensatory Services

Student Name:___________________________ Current School:________________

Parent Name:____________________________ Parent Phone:_________________

My child was enrolled in the Bridge Program at Joshua Eaton:

_____ 2014-2015

_____ 2015-2016

I would like to access Compensatory Services in the following manner:

_____ Option 1: 15 hours




I would like the focus of these sessions to be:

_____ Structured Reading _____ Math _____ Structured Reading and Math

If you do not wish to access these services or an alternate method of compensatory services please

sign below:

__________________________________________________ ___________________

Parent/Guardian Date

Please return the enclosed Document to the Student Services Office by Friday October 13,

2017






Phone: 781-944-5800 Fax: 781-942-9149








TOPIC: Email Correspondence from the Community

Please find attached, for your information, copies of email correspondence received by School

Committee members and Central Office administrators from community members. I have included our

responses as well.


From: Marianne Downing [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2017 9:17 PM To: Doherty, John <[email protected]> Cc: Martin, Craig <[email protected]>; Dowd, Gail <[email protected]> Subject: school committee letter on science spending with answers final.docx - assuming you are OK with attached, this can go to BOS (changes accepted).

John, Craig & Gail: Thanks for the explanations and filling in where needed. I accepted all redlines and deleted one inadvertent extra line of comment of mine at the top, and put the word “Answer” in front of your answer about the details of the science computers (e.g., that they are interactive, etc.). I also ensured that all answers are in italics and blue. The blue might not be shown in the BOS packet, not sure. But the italics will show. Assuming the attached is OK – this is what I will send BOS – please confirm. I do note that in this week’s BOS packet, my original email of 9/11 is not there, so by the time they finally put it in a packet, this subsequent follow up with full answers should be able to be put right next to it to close the loop. I will cc all of you on the follow up to BOS. Best Regards

Marianne M. Downing Home Phone: 781-944-3447 Mobile: 508-265-4214 Home Address: 13 Heather Drive – Reading MA Email: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]





Reading Public Schools 1st Annual Tentative Schedule

PARENT UNIVERSITY WHEN

Saturday, October 21st 8:00am – 12:15pm

WHERE

Reading Memorial High School, 62

Oakland Road

Benefit from FREE workshops presented by community

experts on a variety of topics.

FREE childcare for children in grades K through 5 will be

provided by the Extended Day Program. You must pre-register

for childcare when you are registering for Parent University

workshops. Children will be participating in activities run by

1v1 Sports.

Pre-registration will begin on Monday, October 2nd at the

following link:

https://www.reading.k12.ma.us/community/adult-and-

community-education/

Sponsored By

KEYNOTE SPEAKERS: DAVID WALSH, PH.D. & ERIN WALSH, M.A.

PRESENT:

“Connection

Unleashes Children’s

Potential”

8:40am – 9:30am

Performing Arts Center

Workshop Session 1:

9:40am – 10:30am

Navigating the Cyber

World

Intentional Parenting

2017 Reading Youth Risk

Survey Behavior Results

Workshop Session 2:

11:00am – 11:50am

Is There an App for That?

Raising Kids in the Digital

Age

Raising Hardy and

Resilient Children & Youth

Mindfulness & Parenting

College Process:

Roundtable Discussion

with Parents

Student Mental Health

And more……

https://www.reading.k12.ma.us/community/adult-and-community-education/

https://www.reading.k12.ma.us/community/adult-and-community-education/

1



MEMORANDUM


FROM: Gail Dowd

CC: John Doherty


RE: FY 18 Capital Plan Update

At the Reading School Committee meeting on September 25th, we will provide the Committee

during reports with an update on the FY’18 Capital Plan as it relates to repairs to skylights at

the Wood End Elementary School. The Director of Facilities will be available during the

meeting to discuss the specifics of the project.

Attached within the Information Section of the packet, please find a memo from the Town

Manager explaining the funding of the change to the capital plan.

The request will be presented as part of November Town Meeting.



Phone: 781-944-5800 Fax: 781-942-9149




I am here tonight to express my utter disbelief both as a parent and as one of the 3 SEPAC co-chairs. While I am on the SEPAC board, I speak tonight as a parent. At a time when people regularly spout hate and discrimination our very own special education students were the unnecessary victims of discrimination that was first made known to Reading in 2015 in the Walker Report. My husband and I did not join the complainants but the voters and citizens of Reading should know that a larger audience of children were effected. I am still waiting for a response from the School Committee and the Human Relation Advisory Committee as to what has happen to our own students. This discrimination is no different from that due to gender, national origin or religious affiliation. Reading failed to observe the civil rights of our children and was aware of these deficiency’s, and over that ensuing time the schools seemingly, did nothing to correct it. Not once was I made aware of any attempt to fix my sons classroom. Why were the deficiency identified in the walker report not addressed prior to the complaint being filed to the office of civil rights? By my account these violations went on for two years. Its unacceptable that the Reading Public schools choose to address problems only at the point that compliance failures are noted by State or Federal agencies. In the 2015 walker Report pages 28, 29 and 36 detail a series of deficiencies. Which ironically are the ones noted by the OCR complaint. On page 28 it states “Many program spaces and classrooms across the district were either too small or partitioned off and located in less than desirable locations.” and it also states that many recommendations from previous special evaluation reports remain in need of actions. On page 29 it states The district is lacking in professional development program that addresses how general ed staff members assume ownership of student IEPS. Again, another violation cited in the repot. And on page 36, the comments were made “Program space is lacking in some schools and the location of some classes is less than desirable. Special Education programs should be provided in classrooms and are equal in scope and size to general education classrooms. Areas of special education deficiencies need to be addressed. It can no longer wait. How many more violations are out there? Where parents addressed areas that need to be fixed, but have no other option but to file with PQA or OCR. The new DESE mid cycle reviewed tonight shows deficiency in Basics of IEPs deliverables. The legal document that dictates our children’s educational plan. In closing, I’d like the school committee to take a look at any report that Reading has had done, weather voluntary or involuntary. There needs to be a running list with action items. The special education community relies on issues raised in reports and they need to be addressed in a timely fashion. We all need to do better, these are our children. Thank you.

DRAFT - 2017-2018 School Committee Meeting Date

Anticipated Agenda Items

Sept. 25th School Committee

Sept. 28th RCASA Annual Meeting Endslow PAC - 6:30 p.m.

Oct. 11th Financial Forum Budget Guidance Senior Center 7:30 p.m.

Oct. 16th School Committee Office Hours Borawski & Snow Dockser

Oct. 30th School Committee

Nov. 6th School Committee Office Hours Boivin & Nihan

Nov. 13th Town Meeting

Nov.16th Town Meeting


Nov. 21st School Committee


Dec. 4th School Committee Office Hours Borawski & Webb

Dec. 18th School Committee Public Hearing FY2019 Budget

All meetings are in the Superintendent's Conference Room at 7:00 p.m. unless otherwise noted.

Dates and locations subject to change. (Bold indicates new or changed date or location.


Jan. 8th School Committee FY2019 Budget Office Hours Snow Dockser & Boivin

Jan.11th School Committee FY2019 Budget

Jan. 13th School Committee

Jan. 16th School Committee FY2019 Budget

Jan. 18th School Committee FY2019 Budget - Vote

Feb. 5th School Committee Office Hours Nihan & Robinson

Feb. 7th FY19 Budget Presentation Town Hall

Feb. 26th School Committee

March 5th School Committee Office Hours Borawski & Boivin

March 7th Fincom - 7:30 p.m. Vote FY19 Budget & TM Articles

March 19th School Committee

April 3rd Local Election

April 9th School Committee Office Hours Nihan & Webb

April 23rd Town Meeting

April 24th School Committee

April 26th Town Meeting




April 30th Town Meeting

May 3rd Town Meeting

May 7th School Committee School Choice Office Hours Robinson & Snow Dockser

May 21st School Committee

June 3rd RMHS Graduation

June 4th School Committee Staff Recognition Office Hours

June 18th School Committee

9.22.17 Meeting dates subject to change

