February 7, 2019 Doug Evans, CEO Darren Mire, Board Chairman James M. Singleton Charter School 2220 Oretha Castle Haley Blvd. New Orleans, Louisiana 70113 Re: Notice of Non-Compliance, Level 2: Special Education (SPED) Dear Mr. Evans and Mr. Mire: I am writing to inform you that James M. Singleton Charter School (Singleton) is receiving this Notice of Non-Compliance, Level 2: Special Education because Singleton was found to be in non-compliance with its legal obligations regarding supporting students with disabilities, per the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part B, as identified in the Charter Operating Agreement. On January 14, 2019, the Office of Equity and Accountability received a parent concern regarding a student not receiving their related services per the student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP). As part of the procedure for investigating such concerns, the Director of School Performance conducted an on-site review of the specified student’s special education file, including the related service logs and service minutes. This review confirmed the parent’s concern. This finding prompted an in-depth review of other special education students’ files. Based upon our on-site student records review on January 22, 2019 at Singleton, observations showed patterns of systematic and student-specific non-compliance as it pertains to the delivery of special education services, including not providing appropriate services under students’ IEPs, both a violation of federal and state law. Evidence shows ongoing concern in the area of related service provisions. To address this non-compliance concern, Singleton will need to successfully complete the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Show evidence no later than February 28, 2019 that Singleton has invested in services to provide ongoing learning and professional development and technical assistance to school staff in IEP writing, SER, and provisions of services. Guidance on the following should include, but not limited to: a. Identification/ Evaluation i. Ensure that all Triennial Re-evaluations are conducted within required timelines under Louisiana Bulletin 1508 ii. Documented evidence that communications according to timelines specified by local, state, and federal policy are shared with parent/ guardians (e.g., progress reports, grades) b. Service Provision i. Provide services in accordance with students’ IEPs ii. Students with disabilities participate in State assessments that are appropriate for their individual needs as determined by their IEP Singleton will be subject to, at a minimum, monthly monitoring from a mutually agreed upon third-party monitor to assess special education compliance starting no later than February 28, 2019 and concluding May 20, 2019. Singleton shall pay all costs associated with the mutually agreed upon third-party monitor. The third-party monitor shall provide monthly reports to OPSB’s Office of Equity and Accountability and the Board President of James Singleton Charter School regarding its assessment of the school’s performance against the protocol criteria within the appendix, along with an overall assessment of the school’s performance at the conclusion of the oversight time period. Exiting the level 2 non-compliance and returning to good standing with regards to special education obligations will be contingent on the consistent compliance (at least 95% compliance), per the monitor’s monthly reports, along with an overall assessment provided at the conclusion of the oversight period. We look forward to your cooperation and compliance by the timelines outlined in this correspondence. Failure to meet these expectations by the dates indicated may result in escalated consequences, including but not limited to reduction in charter term upon renewal, or revocation of your charter contract with OPSB. We appreciate your prompt attention to this matter. Please contact Gayla Robbins Mair at gmair@opsb.us with any questions that you may have regarding this letter. Yours in Education, Kelli R. Peterson, Ed.D. Senior Equity and Accountability Officer Appendix: Summary of Concerns, LDOE & SPLC Monitoring Protocol, Notice of Non-Compliance, Level 1: Special Education cc: Dr. Henderson Lewis Jr., OPSB Superintendent School: Date: James Singleton Charter School 1-22-2019 OPSB Representative: Gayla Robbins Mair School Representative: Tia Robertson IEP Date Acceptable Documentation (to be provided by LEA) IEP dated within one calendar year Evaluation Date Evaluation or waiver dated within 3 years IEP Compliance with Evaluation Student exceptionality on IEP aligns with evaluation IEP Signatures IEP is signed by all Required Parties Service Minutes Provided Progress Reports Special Education Compliance Policy Status at Review Notes ☐ In Compliance ☒ Not In Compliance ☐ Not Available/Missing ☒ In Compliance ☐ Not In Compliance ☐ Not Available/Missing 7/14 files in compliance ☒ In Compliance ☐ Not In Compliance ☐ Not Available/Missing ☐ In Compliance ☒ Not In Compliance ☐ Not Available/Missing 10/14 files in compliance; 4/14 files not in compliance Evidence of service minutes provided in accordance with current IEP for previous and current semester (or since IEP creation/date) ☐ In Compliance ☒ Not In Compliance ☐ Not Available/Missing 2/14 files in compliance; 12/14 files are not in compliance. Most recent 2 progress reports are present in the folder and signed by the parent. ☐ In Compliance ☒ Not In Compliance ☐ Not Available/Missing 5/14 files in compliance; 9/14 files are not in compliance 11/14 files in compliance; 3/14 files not in compliance 6/14 files in compliance ; 8/14 files not in compliance 5mm: Jamm Schuul op" R'P'mm' Rubbmx Mm mm: January 22. 2mg Schnul Rewasenmive' student A-- may! nzlilv:Sveech may Camuns Dehils Sum: 31 Review Mules ma Date mama my a up (emphaan I: Nu! mpumaa NolszulabWMussmfi a 0mm muaapau Date Evens Wampuma NaaWampuam NolAvaulawaussmE a 0mm an Wampuma NaaWampuam NalAvaHabll/Mussmg a 0mm IEPussugned mu mama mm Wampuma NaaWampuam NolszulabWMussmfi a 0mm Semi: Munute: Evudznz: 0' mm mmums mu uncampuma 3 Nu! mpumaa mama Nmmibwmm 0W Progress Reruns Moslrezzml uncampuma Wmm'mp'm" NolszulabWMussmfi a 0mm Student may Camuns Dehils Sum: 31 Review Mules mum mama uncampuma NolszulabWMussmfi a 0mm muaapauum uuzampuama I: mamuaawmmg emu uncampuam a whey Wampuam a whey Semzszute: Wampuam ma um mo mama, paua mm mama mm Progressfiepons Wampuam a whey mm Except nalitv: MID foldev Cnmems Details Slams a! Review Mules \EPsz 2 mmnawmmg a 01m Evaluauanbalz 2 lermomphame mmnawmmg a 01m 2 Evaluillrm mmnawmmg a 01m mude mm mm: mum-nu mum! Hanan/dirt] "y'ammgpi'u' :l 0mm Student Ell! MIDI -- or foldev Cnmems Details Slams a! Review Nate: 3 mmnawmmg a 01m 1 lap mm." mm 2 mm" 3 mmnawmmg a 01m \EPngnamres 2 lermomphame mmnawmmg a 01m 2 vamzd mm 2 a 01m 5mm nzlitv om] foldev Cnmems Details Slams 2! Review Mme: mp om lipnmd Wm one "man my mumpan Mm In mmnanm/Mmg a 0mm Evaluillrm om Eu'uauon mmwuuma mm." 1 years mmnanm/Mmg a 01m mp cumppam Evaluillrm swam an mp ihzns mu :vi'uauon I: Nollntamphame mmnanm/Mmg a 01m mp S'gnamres mp "gm Rgnuwgd mmnanm/Mmg a mm m; m. Sun-mm Senna vamzd (want: 00 mm mmums Dmvmed mm (Wren: mp corms/mus and mm." me mp 2 mmnanm/Mmg a 01m mm; spa) mm mm an my Remus Mosuezzml Dresem mmmmnanm/Mmg a mm mm Ibvm'manb Ext: nzlitv Student r. Develuymemal Delay may Cnmems Details Slams 2! Review Mme: mp om 2 mmnanm/Mmg a 01m mumman 2 umMmm mmnanm/Mmg a 01m "imam" 2 mmnanm/Mmg a 01m \EPngnamres 2 mmnanm/Mmg a cum: 2 vamzd WAWMWW 0W Hanan/dale} 2 mmnanm/Mmg a 01m 1m. Singleton Chum SLhuol ups: Represenlallw' Kelli Juxdun um: 1/22/19 Schqu Reyresenmive: Student A- 303- Excepliunalitv: may Cnmems Dehils Smus at Review um; mpum mpama ummpnam I: mmnanm/Mmg Damn Eu'uauon Date amawnma mmnanm/Mmg a 01m mp (nmphanzz Eu'uauon 5mm" :uemmnalny an lEchEns Mm zvaluillnn Naumanm/Mmp 01m mp mp mm mm Renulred Fame} 3 Not In mmnanm/Mmg Damn Semi: Mmutes meded Mum nl semi: mlnums mama (Wm mp my pvwouszm'l (hymn: mum Am me mp 3 Na! mmnanm/Mmg mm [mm mm <> Student I - DOB -- raider Cnmems neuils Mme; mp Date mpama nnen'u'dlwuv In (emphaan I: No! mmnanm/Mmg Emu < 1m. Chum SLhuol ops: Representative Hully pump um: 1/22/19 5:>>qu 5mm A- DOB-- Excepliunalilv: om foldev CDMEMS neuils Smus ax Review um; Wm "Mann. mpum mpama In (manIam I: NolszIlaMe/MIssmfi mm." mIImIon Date mummnn a my; a In cnmpIIznm 3 Not In NolszIlaMe/MIssmfi a 0mm mp (nmphanzz mn mIImIon Sudan :uemmnalny an lEchErIs wIm tvaluillnn In cnmpIIznm 3 Not In NalAvaIlabll/MIssIHE 0mm Sm mp sum-m mp Is sIgnm RgnuIrgd Fame} In cnmpIIznm 2 Not In NolszIlaMe/MIssmfi Dom" mm, mm Semi: Prowde Mum semi: mlnums In mn (uvrem mp Ian pvevmuszm'l (hymn: Semesnfl In: me mp (rezunn amI In cnmpIIznm 2 Na! NolszIlaMe/MIssmfi a 0mm pm I7, n. ii VI:st Murmsz my"; Wm rm. 2 mm We may." a In (MW 2 Noun (Innm no: Wm" N01 szIIaMe/MIssI-Ig (my mum a I noa-- Exceptiunalitv: folds! Cnmems Derails Smus at Review Nukes mm mp waned ammusz a In (MW 2 Noun (Innm I.an NolszIlaMe/MIssmfi 0mm mIImIon Date mummnn a my; a NalAvaHabll/MIssmg Damn mmnquum.n nm mm mhmtuzmmanfu-Ixcml mp (nmphanzz mn mIImIon Sudan :uemmnalny an lEchErIs wIm tvaluillnn In Mm In (emphaan a 1mm amflmuun Imn '41: mm mp mp sum-m mp Is sIgnm Renulred Fame} In Mm In (emphaan 0 mm mp Na an From>> mp Semi: Prowde Mum semi: mlnums In mn (uvrem mp Ian pvevmuszm'l (hymn: Semesnfl In: me mp (rezunn amI In Mm In (emphaan a 1mm WI. le Inim mu WEK mu Nu numchn; Inim Progress Repons Mail {2(an 2 pram Iommna mm by In! pm." In Mm In (emphaan a (mm a 1mm Mm szIIzbw/MIssmfi I "In. In: 01 Excepliunalilv: m: a. Student - noa- sw cnIneIns Details sun-Is In Review We; IEP Date waned nnmIenamw In (emphaan I: No! Incomplumz NolszIlaMe/MIssInfi Damn Bahama" Date wmIInsyem In NolszIlaMe/MIssInfi a 0mm lEP(nmphanzzwIth In Mum" NalAvaIlabll/MIssmE a 0mm IEPSIgniluvzs Fame} In NolszIlaMe/MIssInfi Damn seme Meme mm names pmnnen In mn a In 2 Na! Incomplumz In." sun/mm Prov/Ide 0W (rezurm aneI Progress newm In NolszIlaMe/MIssInfi 0mm Excepliunalilv: ID- smdem D. DOB: cnIneIns Details sun-Is In Review We; waned In (Dmplunm NolszIlaMe/MIssInfi 0mm Bahama" Date gunman Mann 3 V1213 In (Omnhame I: Not In (amnhame NalAvaIIabll/MIssmg Domev lEP(nmphanzz mn smem an wIm evaluation In Mm In (emphaan mIImIon mmnama/ang 1.7th IEP sugnannes IEP Is sIgned hvaIl xenwea Fame} In Mm In (omnhimz senwe Mmutes Prov/Ide Meme mm mlnulgs EIvade In mn (uvrem IEP Ian (Wren: In: nnee IEP In Mm In (omnhimz [7th run Invvtumlm') [mm mm Progress Repons Mosl me." 2 nnesenn Iomenna :Iened by me mm" In Mm In (omnhimz 1.7th 17th Nm a 0: Warm .n me Related Services File Review Protocol Yes No N/A Student File Review Protocol 1. The parents were invited to the Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting. ☐ ☐ ☐ 2. If neither parent was able to attend the IEP team meeting, there is documentation of attempts to ensure parental participation. ☐ ☐ ☐ 3. The appropriate team members were present at the IEP team meeting (signature provided at IEP Team meeting). ☐ ☐ ☐ 4. The IEP for a school-age student includes a statement of present levels of academic achievement and functional performance, including how the student’s disability affects involvement and progress in the general education curriculum. ☐ ☐ ☐ The IEP includes measurable, standards-based annual goals, including academic and functional goals. Benchmarks or short-term objectives should be included for students who take alternate assessments aligned to alternate achievement ☐ standards. ☐ ☐ The IEP contains related services which are reasonably calculated to enable the student to advance appropriately toward attaining annual goals; to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum in accordance with the student’s present levels of academic achievement and functional performance; to participate in extracurricular and other academic activities; and to be educated and participate with other children with disabilities and nondisabled children in academic and non-academic school activities. ☐ ☐ ☐ The IEP contains an explanation of the extent, if any, to which the student will not participate with nondisabled students in the general education class and the LEA ensured that to the maximum extent possible the student wa ☐ educated with nondisabled students. ☐ ☐ The IEP contains descriptions of how progress toward annual goals will be measured, including how often parents will be regularly informed of their child’s progress. ☐ ☐ ☐ Related services are being provided to the student in the types and frequency specified in the student’s IEP. ☐ ☐ ☐ 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. LDOE & SPLC Related Services Monitoring Protocols 2015-2016 Related Services Staff Interview Questions Questions include but are not limited to the following: 1. Describe, in general, how your school determines that a student requires related services in order to provide a particular student with a free, appropriate public education. What factors are considered? 2. Describe, in general, how related services are provided to students at your school, including identifying the personnel who provide such services, how related services are scheduled into the academic day, and how the school provides services in cases of provider unavailability. Were any of the identified related service providers unavailable for all or part of the year? Describe the steps, if any, taken to address this unavailability. 3. 4 Describe the process by which school staff secures related service providers upon the enrollment of new students with specific related service needs. How long does this process take? 5. Describe the information available to IEP Teams related to the impact of related services on an individual student’s functional performance and academic achievement. 6. Describe any steps taken at your school to minimize the impact of students’ removal from general educational activities for the receipt of related services on the students’ academic achievement. LDOE & SPLC Related Services Monitoring Protocols 2015-2016 Child Find File Review Monitoring Protocol Yes No N/A Student File Review Protocols 1. 2. 3. 4. The School Building Level Committee (“SBLC”) that discussed the student’s academic needs was comprised of at least a classroom teacher, the teacher who referred the student to the SBLC, and the principal of the school or a designee of the principal. If the School Building Level Committee referred the student for an initial evaluation, parental consent for an initial evaluation was obtained within a reasonable time following the SBLC’s decision to refer the student. Sufficient screening, including – if appropriate – participation in the Response to Intervention process, was conducted to identify the student as suspected of having a disability. If the student’s parent has requested an initial evaluation, the LEA either (1) requested parental consent to conduct the evaluation or (2) notified the parent in writing that the evaluation would not be conducted and the reasons that the LEA believed that an evaluation of the student was unnecessary. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ 5. If student participated in the RTI process, the school collected sufficient data to determine the effectiveness of the interventions provided to the student. ☐ ☐ ☐ 6. If student did not maintain expected progress while participating in the Response to Intervention process, the student was referred to the SBLC for consideration of an initial evaluation within a reasonable amount of time. ☐ ☐ ☐ 7. Parental notice was provided describing any evaluation procedures that the agency proposed to conduct. Parental consent was obtained to conduct an initial evaluation. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. A variety of assessment tools and strategies (not the use of a single measure or assessment as the sole criterion) were used to gather relevant functional, developmental and academic information about the child, including information provided by the parent. Existing data (ex: evaluation data and info provided by parent; current classroom based, local or state assessment data; classroom observations and related service provider observations) was reviewed to determine continued eligibility. A variety of sources (ex: teacher data, parent data, and related services data) were used to determine student eligibility. For students who are eligible under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the student’s educational records indicate that the student does not require specially designed instruction. LDOE & SPLC Child Find Monitoring Protocol Child Find Staff Interview Questions Questions include but are not limited to the following: Describe the processes for conducting SBLC meetings, including the frequency of such meetings, the composition of the SBLC, the types of data considered by the SBLC, and the outcomes of the SBLC, in its normal course of business. Describe the process by which students at your school are referred to the SBLC. When was the last time a student 2. at your school was referred to the SBLC? 1. 3. Describe the structure of the RTI process at your school, including the role of SBLC members, regular education teachers, special education staff, and school administrators in the RTI process. 4. Describe the implementation of the RTI process at your school, including how academic and behavioral interventions are planned, implemented, and assessed for effectiveness. How often is a student’s progress in RTI reviewed? Describe how special education evaluations are initiated at your school, including the process by which school staff refer students for an initial evaluation. 5. 6. Describe the process by which school staff respond to parental requests for an initial evaluation. Is this process the same if the student is in the RTI process? 7. Describe, in general, how special education evaluations are conducted at your school, including the personnel responsible for conducting such evaluations. 8. Describe how determinations are made concerning whether a student should be considered for eligibility under the IDEA or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act at your school. 9. Describe, in general, the process by which the school completes initial evaluations for those students no longer enrolled in the school. LDOE & SPLC Child Find Monitoring Protocol Yes Discipline Student File Review Monitoring Protocol No N/A Student File Review Protocols 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The Individualized Education Program (IEP) team considered, in the case of a student whose behavior impedes his/her learning, the use of positive behavioral interventions, supports, and/or other strategies to address the behavior. ☐ ☐ ☐ Within ten (10) days of any decision to change the placement of a student with a disability because of a violation of a code of student conduct, the LEA conducted a manifestation determination. ☐ ☐ ☐ The LEA notified the parent on the same day as the date of the removal decision of any removal that constituted a change of placement and provided the parent with a copy of the notice of the procedural safeguards. ☐ ☐ ☐ The IEP team considered relevant information in the student’s file, including the student’s IEP, any teacher observations, and any relevant information provided by the parent, to determine whether the behavior was a manifestation of the student’s disability. ☐ ☐ ☐ If the IEP team determined that the behavior was not a manifestation of the student’s disability and the suspension/expulsion was applied, the student continued to receive services so as to enable the student to continue to participate in the general education curriculum, although in another setting, and to progress toward meeting the goals set out in the student’s IEP. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ If the IEP team determined that the behavior was a manifestation of the student’s disability, the student was returned to the current placement, unless the parent and the LEA agree to a change in placement as part of the behavioral intervention plan (“BIP”) or unless the behavior is related to weapons, drugs, or serious bodily injury. If the student did not have a functional behavioral assessment (“FBA”) developed and a BIP implemented prior to the removal, and the behavior was determined by the IEP team to be a manifestation of the disability, the IEP team completed the FBA and developed a BIP as soon as practicable. If the student had a BIP, the IEP team reviewed the plan as part of the manifestation determination process and revised it as needed. LDOE & SPLC Discipline Monitoring Protocols 2015-2016 Discipline Staff Interview Questions Questions include but are not limited to the following: 1. Describe any school-wide behavior management programs in place at your school. Does this program differ for students with disabilities? Is the program based upon the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports? 2. Describe the system that your school uses to record and maintain disciplinary data. Does the system record outof-school suspensions? In-school suspensions? Time spent in the “behavior room,” “cool-down room,” or “time- out center”? Do school staff contact parents or family members and request that they pick up their students early from school for disciplinary purposes? How frequently does this occur? How are these removals recorded? 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Describe the procedures that your school implements when recommending a student for suspension or expulsion, including how notice is provided to parents and any procedures available to parents who want to contest the proposed disciplinary actions. Describe the procedures in place at your school to ensure that the procedural safeguards identified in the IDEA are provided to students with disabilities who are subject to over ten (10) days of disciplinary removal during a school year. Describe the processes for conducting Manifestation Determination Reviews (MDRs), including the frequency of such meetings, the composition of the participating staff, the types of information considered, and the outcomes. Describe how your school conducts FBAs and creates BIPs for students, including the circumstances under which an FBA is initiated, the extent to which parents are included in the FBA process, and how BIPs are shared with relevant school staff. Describe, in general, how your school measures and documents the effectiveness of BIPs and how that information is shared with parents and IEP Team. LDOE & SPLC Discipline Monitoring Protocols 2015-2016 October 5, 2018 Mr. Daryl Evans, Board President Mrs. Tia Robertson, Principal James M. Singleton Charter School 2220 Oretha C. Haley Blvd. New Orleans, Louisiana 70133 Re: Notice of Non-Compliance, Level 2 Dear Mr. Evans: I am writing to inform you that James Singleton Charter School is receiving this Notice of Non-Compliance, Level 2 because the school was found to be non-compliant with its legal obligations regarding supporting students with disabilities as identified in the Charter Operating Agreement. The Office of Equity and Accountability received an Exceptional Children’s complaint filed against the school concerning the provision of educational and related services. Based upon on our review, we have determined James Singleton Charter School did not provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE), including not providing appropriate services under an IEP, both a violation of federal and state law. When a student has not been provided FAPE, they are entitled to compensatory services. To address this non-compliance concern James Singleton Charter School will need to successfully complete the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The school shall convene an IEP Team meeting no later than November 9, 2018, inclusive of all required team members, to determine appropriate compensatory services. The school shall submit a summary of the IEP Team meeting to OPSB no later than November 13, 2018, including the school’s plan for providing appropriate compensatory services. The written plan to deliver such services for each area of need shall detail allocated time, location, service providers, and any other relevant information pertaining to such services. Submit to OPSB no later than November 16, 2018 a copy of the compensatory services letter signed by the parent documenting notification of services and whether or not the parent has accepted the offer of services. Note that all compensatory services are at Singleton Charter’s sole expense. We look forward to your compliance by the determine timelines outlined in this correspondence. Failure to respond to these remedies may result in escalated consequences, including, but not limited to, additional intervention, reduction in charter term upon renewal, or revocation of your charter contract with OPSB. Please contact Gayla Mair at gmair@opsb.us with any questions that you may have regarding this letter. Yours in Education, Kelli R. Peterson, Ed.D. Executive Director of Equity & Accountability Cc: Dr. Henderson Lewis Jr., Superintendent