The Maine Department of Education (DOE) is providing a second 30-day comment period regarding master contractual agreements for private schools offering special education programs. During the first comment period in October 2025, many of you outlined similar observations, suggestions, and concerns. The Maine DOE used that feedback (posted here) to significantly revise the master contractual agreement.
Please note some of the resulting changes to the updated master contractual agreement, summarized in the table below:
| Original Section | Revised Section | Comment | Resulting Change |
| General |
Commenters recommended having two master contractual agreements, distinguishing between school types: special purpose private schools and private schools approved for the receipt of public funds for tuition purposes. |
The Maine DOE agrees and proposes two master contractual agreements: one for special purpose private schools and one for private schools approved for the receipt of public funds for tuition purposes. | |
| 1. Services Provided | Omitted | Commenters felt the list of services was incomplete, and it was unclear whether a private school was expected to provide all of the services listed. |
This section was eliminated, and the list of services was removed. The intent of this section was to ensure that students placed in private schools receive all of the services in their IEPs. To that end, a requirement was added in Section 2(d) that the placing SAU and the private school agree in writing which entity will be responsible for providing each of the services on the student’s IEP. |
| 2. Education Settings | 1. Education Settings | Some commenters questioned whether this section is necessary. |
The purpose of this section is to ensure that the private school offers the setting described in the student’s IEP as the least restrictive environment. The Maine DOE has moved the last line regarding transition to less restrictive environments to the new Section 2(c) since it refers to a policy. |
| 3. Admissions | 2. Admissions and Placement | Commenters noted that the standards for removal of students from a private school or program are very high. The Maine DOE should consider using the Massachusetts model. |
This section is mostly new and is taken from the Massachusetts regulations, as recommended by several commenters. The Maine DOE believes that the sharing of this information between the private school, the placing SAU, and the parent at the beginning of the relationship sets the stage for successful collaboration. |
| 7. Relationship to the Placing SAUs | 4. Single Point of Contact | Some commenters were concerned that one person would not have the breadth of knowledge to respond effectively. |
The Maine DOE has clarified this section to include “designee(s)” but continues to believe that there must be a named individual at the private school and the placing SAU who is ultimately responsible for the placement. |
| 4. Provision of Services | 5. Provision of Services | Some commenters questioned whether this section is necessary. |
This language tracks requirements in MUSER and includes a straightforward statement of the obligation of the private school to implement the IEP. |
| 5. Attendance | 6. Attendance | Some commenters questioned whether this section is necessary. |
The Maine DOE believes that it is necessary to maintain attendance data—particularly data involving removal from a student’s educational program, as federal and state special education law require action by the placing SAU after removals (including cumulative removals) of 10 school days. |
| 6. Removal or Discharge | 7. Removal or Discharge |
This section attracted the most comment. Commenters did not agree with the Maine DOE’s initial proposal of tying the private school to the placing SAU because of concerns that the two entities would not agree, and it would be difficult to have a proceeding where a party was asked to present the position of another party with whom it disagreed. Many commenters suggested that the Maine DOE adopt the structure in the Massachusetts regulations that provides for both routine and emergency terminations with specific timeframes and obligations. |
The Maine DOE agrees and is adopting the Massachusetts provisions for terminations. |
| 8. Monitoring and Enforcement | 8. Monitoring and Enforcement | Commenters reported that the language was confusing and/or potentially conflicted with MUSER or current practice. |
The Maine DOE made some minor changes and removed the piece about monitoring, which commenters suggested was either confusing or potentially conflicted with MUSER or current practice. |
Before finalizing the master contractual agreements, the Maine DOE is providing this additional 30-day comment period from January 10 until February 10, 2026. Interested parties are encouraged to provide feedback, which will be used when finalizing the master contractual agreements—to be issued by March 1, 2026.
Please find the revised master contractual agreements for comment below:
You may provide comments using this form. Questions may be directed to Laura Cyr at Laura.Cyr@maine.gov.
