Massachusetts
State Protections and Legal Framework
-
State constitutional guarantees regarding right to education
Massachusetts State Constitution, Part Second, Chapter V, Section II ( See also https://edlawcenter.org/assets/files/pdfs/State%20Constitution%20Education%20Clause%20Language.pdf for a list of all state constitution education clauses.) : The Encouragement of Literature. “Wisdom, and knowledge, as well as virtue, diffused generally among the body of the people, being necessary for the preservation of their rights and liberties; and as these depend on spreading the opportunities and advantages of education in the various parts of the country, and among the different orders of the people, it shall be the duty of legislatures and magistrates, in all future periods of this commonwealth, to cherish the interests of literature and the sciences, and all seminaries of them; especially the university at Cambridge, public schools and grammar schools in the towns[ ]. . . .” Mass. Const. pt. II, ch. V, § II. (Emphasis added)
Case law and legislative history defining and interpreting the right to education
McDuffy v. Sec’y of the Exec. Off. of Educ., 415 Mass. 545, 615 N.E.2d 516 (1993). The education clause imposes a duty to provide an education to all children through public schools. The Court, citing Rose v. Council for Better Education, Inc., outlined seven capabilities an educated child must possess: sufficient oral and written communication skills to enable students to function in a complex and rapidly changing civilization; sufficient knowledge of economic, social, and political systems to enable students to make informed choices; sufficient understanding of governmental processes to enable the student to understand the issues that affect his or her community, state, and nation; sufficient self-knowledge and knowledge of his or her mental and physical wellness; sufficient grounding in the arts to enable each student to appreciate his or her cultural and historical heritage; sufficient training or preparation for advanced training in either academic or vocational fields so as to enable each child to choose and pursue life work intelligently; and sufficient level of academic or vocational skills to enable public school students to compete favorably with their counterparts in surrounding states, in academics or in the job market. ( See McDuffy v. Sec’y of the Exec. Off. of Educ., 415 Mass. 545, 618 (1993) (quoting Rose v. Council for Better Educ., Inc., 790 S.W.2d 186 (Ky. 1989)).)
Hancock v. Comm’r of Educ., 443 Mass. 428, 822 N.E. 2d 1134 (2005). The Court declined to find the Commonwealth in violation of the Massachusetts Constitution and held that the department of education had made measurable progress since the McDuffy decision and that the Commonwealth would continue to honor its obligations.
State constitutional protections regarding non-discrimination and equity
“All people are born free and equal and have certain natural, essential and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness. Equality under the law shall not be denied or abridged because of sex, race, color, creed or national origin.” Mass. Const. art. I
Other relevant state constitutional civil rights protections
N/A
-
State law equivalents to Title VI, Title IX, Section 504, and the Educational Opportunities Act (EEOA)
The Massachusetts Civil Rights Act (MCRA) protects Commonwealth residents and visitors to Massachusetts against threats and interference with their civil rights, including the right to attend school. Massachusetts Civil Rights Act, M.G.L. c. 12, § 11H-11J.
Additional state civil rights protections that go beyond federal requirements (e.g., protections for LGBTQ+ students, multilingual learners, undocumented students)
The Massachusetts Anti-Bullying Law ( General Law - Part I, Title XII, Chapter 71, Section 37O) prohibits bullying by students or school staff on school grounds or at school activities.
“Bullying shall be prohibited: (i) on school grounds, property immediately adjacent to school grounds, at a school-sponsored or school-related activity, function or program whether on or off school grounds, at a school bus stop, on a school bus or other vehicle owned, leased or used by a school district or school, or through the use of technology or an electronic device owned, leased or used by a school district or school and (ii) at a location, activity, function or program that is not school-related, or through the use of technology or an electronic device that is not owned, leased or used by a school district or school, if the bullying creates a hostile environment at school for the victim, infringes on the rights of the victim at school or materially and substantially disrupts the education process or the orderly operation of a school. Nothing contained herein shall require schools to staff any non-school related activities, functions, or programs. Retaliation against a person who reports bullying, provides information during an investigation of bullying, or witnesses or has reliable information about bullying shall be prohibited.” M.G.L. c. 71, § 37O(b)
The law also requires schools to design anti-bullying plans which “recognize that certain students may be more vulnerable to becoming a target of bullying or harassment based on actual or perceived differentiating characteristics, including race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, sex, socioeconomic status, homelessness, academic status, gender identity or expression, physical appearance, pregnant or parenting status, sexual orientation, mental, physical, developmental or sensory disability or by association with a person who has or is perceived to have 1 or more of these characteristics.” M.G.L. c. 71, § 37O(d)(3)
The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) also publishes additional guidance on schools notifying parents of LGBTQ+ students about bullying or harassment related to sexual orientation or gender identity. ( Guidance on Notifying Parents When a Student Has Been Bullied Based on Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity/Expression - Student and Family Support (SFS))
State law (General Law - Part I, Title XII, Chapter 71A, Section 4) requires that all students who are not proficient in English shall be taught English, regardless of their ethnicity or national origins. M.G.L. c. 71A, § 4
State regulations (603 CMR 26.00: Access To Equal Educational Opportunity - Education Laws and Regulations) provide further protection, including requiring that guidance and counseling be available in a student’s primary language and that district and school handbooks should be available in the primary language of a parent or student whose primary language is not English. 603 CMR 26.00: M.G.L. c. 76, § 5.
State law protections regarding color of law or pattern/practice liability for law enforcement in schools
Massachusetts Civil Rights Act (MCRA), M.G.L. c. 12, § 11H
State law addresses the presence of school resource officers in public schools, including requiring the chief of police to work with the school superintendent to establish operating procedures to provide guidance to school resource officers about their role including: “a statement and description of students' legal rights, including the process for searching and questioning students and circumstances requiring notification to and presence of parents and administrators[.]” M.G.L. c.71, § 37P
Anti-discrimination protections under state human rights statutes
Massachusetts Civil Rights Act
Massachusetts Student Anti-Discrimination Act ( General Law - Part I, Title XII, Chapter 71, Section 76; see also, https://www.mass.gov/doc/massachusetts-civil-rights-act-a-guide-for-residents-and-visitors/download )
“Every person shall have a right to attend the public schools of the town where he actually resides, subject to the following section. . . .No person shall be excluded from or discriminated against in admission to a public school of any town, or in obtaining the advantages, privileges and courses of study of such public school on account of race, color, sex, gender identity, religion, national origin or sexual orientation.” M.G.L. c. 76, § 5.
Private right of action provisions under state civil rights and human rights statutes
Massachusetts Civil Rights Act
Identify whether state anti-discrimination laws also prohibit discrimination caused by disparate impact. If yes, does the state law allow a private right of action for disparate impact claims?
-
Is the right provided by state law conferred on the student, parent/guardian, or both? In other words, who can bring a claim under this law?
“The parent or legal guardian of any school child shall have legal standing to sue for enforcement of the provisions of this chapter, and if successful shall be awarded reasonable attorney's fees, costs and compensatory damages.” M.G.L. c. 71A, § 6(a). (General Law - Part I, Title XII, Chapter 71A, Section 6)
Does the specified law or policy provide protections against retaliation? What are the elements of a retaliation claim? Are protections against retaliation clearly spelled out in the law or policy?
The Massachusetts Anti-Bullying Law does clearly prohibit retaliation. M.G.L. c. 71, § 37O(b). See quote above.
Statute of limitations for filing education-related state civil rights complaints (or state civil rights complaints broadly) or state human rights complaints?Three years for the cause of action for actions arising from violations of any law intended for the protection of civil rights. M.G.L. c. 260, § 5B (General Law - Part III, Title V, Chapter 260, Section 5B).
Anyone may file a complaint through the DESE Problem Resolution System (PRS) alleging that a school or district is not meeting its legal obligations. (Problem Resolution System - Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education) However, the PRS page directs certain issues outside of DESE’s scope to other authorities, including civil rights. (Additional State and Federal Resources - Problem Resolution System)
Victims of discrimination in schools can file a civil rights complaint with the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office. (https://www.mass.gov/info-details/civil-rights-protections-in-education-and-schools )
Are there areas where the state laws provide more protections than federal law? What are those areas?
The Student Anti-Discrimination Act provides greater protection based on religion than Title VI, which applies only to discrimination based on race, color or national origin. (https://www.mass.gov/doc/guidance-on-schools-legal-obligations-to-prevent-and-address-hate-and-bias-incidents-sept-2024/download ) The Act also explicitly includes gender identity and sexual orientation.
How do I file a complaint about discrimination in a K-12 public school in Massachusetts?
Attorney General’s Office - Civil Rights Division
-
Who is eligible to file (students, parents, advocates, others)?
The Civil Rights Division accepts and reviews complaints alleging civil rights violations in public education and other protected areas. While the Division does not explicitly restrict who may file, the online complaint form (https://massago.hylandcloud.com/203appnet/UnityForm.aspx?key=UFKey) allows complainants to indicate they are seeking assistance for “myself,” “a family member,” “my client,” “as a business,” or “someone else not listed above,” and also provides an option to let the AG’s Office know about a “business or trade practice,” indicating that students, parents, guardians, advocates, organizations, and other members of the public are all eligible to file complaints with the Civil Rights Division.
Are there other administrative processes someone may have to exhaust before initiating a complaint? (i.e., going through school’s, district’s, or other agency’s process first, etc.)
The Civil Rights Division does not require complainants to exhaust other administrative remedies—such as a school, district, or other agency’s internal complaint process—before filing with the Attorney General’s Office. Individuals may file directly with the Civil Rights Division regardless of whether they have pursued other avenues. However, depending on the nature of the complaint, the Division may make “referrals to other organizations or government agencies”. Complainants may also choose to file with these agencies in addition to, or instead of, the Civil Rights Division.
How to initiate the process (relevant websites, standard forms, submission locations)
The Civil Rights Division accepts complaints primarily through its online complaint portal (https://www.mass.gov/how-to/file-a-civil-rights-complaint), which requires information about the complainant, information about the entity or individual the complainant is complaining about, and a description of the complaint. Complainants can also contact the Civil Rights Division by phone at (617) 963-2917 or by tax at (617) 727-5762 for assistance.
Can complaints be filed anonymously or confidentially?
Complaints to the Civil Rights Division cannot be filed anonymously through the online complaint portal, which requires the complainant’s full name and contact information. Disclosure statement in the form indicates that information submitted in the complaint may be provided to the entity or individual the complaint is about in order to resolve the complaint, or to other law enforcement and regulatory agencies, and that certain data concerning the complaint may be publicly posted. However, the online complaint form also states that if the complaint concerns civil rights, the AG’s Office generally will not disclose the complainant’s name, address, phone number, email address, or any other identifying information in response to such a request. If confidentiality is a concern, it may be advisable to contact the Civil Rights Division by phone at (617) 963-2917 to discuss available options.
Are there language access requirements for complaint processes?
The AG’s Office offers multilingual resources (https://www.mass.gov/info-details/attorney-generals-office-multilingual-resources ), including complaint forms and information flyers in Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, Haitian Creole, Vietnamese, Khmer, Arabic, Russian, Lao, Cape Verdean Creole and Italian. However, there’s no specific guidance on interpretation and translation services for complaint processes on the AG’s Office website.
Are there known barriers to accessing enforcement (filing fees, documentation requirements)?
There is no filing fee for making a civil rights complaint with the AG’s office. The complaint process requires a clear and detailed summary of the complaint, including names and dates if possible.
Can complainants have advocates or legal representation?
Yes. The AG’s Office encourages complainants to seek private legal advice regarding any questions concerning your individual legal rights or responsibilities.
Are complainants entitled to legal representation or other advocates to file or at any point in the process?
The AG’s Office does not provide legal representation to individual complainants as their personal counsel. While the AG’s Office enforces civil rights laws in the public interest (including bringing actions in court), complainants are responsible for obtaining their own legal representation or other advocates if desired.
-
What are the required elements of the civil rights claim?
To file a complaint online, the complainant will need to provide the following information:
The type of complaint;
The name of the company, business, or organization that the complainant is filing the complaint against;
A clear and detailed summary of the complaint, including names and dates if possible; and
The complainant’s name and contact information, including a mailing address and phone number.
Other information the complainant can provide that is not required but may be helpful includes:
The address, phone number, or other contact information of the entity the complainant is filing a complaint against (if available);
If the complainant is filing on behalf of someone else;
The complainant’s desired outcome for this complaint;
What actions the complainant has already taken, if any; and
The complainant’s email address.
Who reviews claims and what timeframes apply?
Complaints are reviewed by staff in the Civil Rights Division. Public sources do not provide a guaranteed or statutory timeframe for review. Case prioritization and timelines may depend on seriousness, urgency, and available evidence.
What type of investigation may occur?
The AG’s Division has authority under the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act and related laws to investigate civil rights violations. Investigation tools may include information requests to the school district, review of policies and records, witness interviews, and analysis of compliance history. Examples from Danvers and Southwick investigation show the AG negotiated resolution agreements after documented findings of violations.
Who participates in investigations?
Primarily AG Civil Rights Division attorneys and investigators. In some education cases, the process has included input from complainants, respondents, district leadership, school staff, advocacy organizations, and sometimes external experts engaged for policy review or training.
Are complainants entitled to a hearing of any kind? If yes, what are complainants entitled to during the hearing?
Not specified in public guidance from the AG’s Office. The AG’s civil rights enforcement role generally involves investigations and negotiated or litigated resolutions — not quasi-judicial hearings for complainants.
What privacy/confidentiality protections exist?
The publicly available civil rights complaint instructions do not provide a specific confidentiality policy. While certain protections for investigative records may apply under state law, the online complaint form indicates that the AG’s Office generally does not disclose a complainant’s identifying information in connection with a civil rights complaint.
Are school districts required to publicly post civil rights complaint procedures?
There is no requirement in the Civil Rights Division’s publicly available complaint materials mandating that school districts post the AG’s civil rights complaint procedures. However, school districts may still be required to post certain civil rights complaint procedures under other laws and regulations. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.) requires recipients of federal education funds to notify students, parents, employees, and the public of their nondiscrimination policies and grievance procedures. ( 34 CFR § 106.8 - Designation of coordinator; nondiscrimination policy; grievance procedures; notice of nondiscrimination; training; students with disabilities; and recordkeeping ) 603 CMR, § 26.08 ( 603 CMR, § 26.08 - Notification and Complaint Procedure) mandates that all school handbooks and codes of conduct must contain a nondiscrimination policy consistent with M.G.L. c. 76, § 5, the school’s procedure for accepting, investigating and resolving complaints alleging discrimination or harassment, and disciplinary measures that the school may impose if it determines that harassment or discrimination has occurred.
-
What is the appeals process, if any?
The Civil Rights Division does not publish any formal internal appeals process for complainants whose cases are dismissed, closed, or resolved without action. Public materials on the AG’s civil rights complaint process do not describe an appeal mechanism. Complainants who are dissatisfied may choose to file another complaint with the Civil Rights Division, file with another agency with jurisdiction, or pursue a private legal action in court under applicable state or federal laws.
Are remedies legally enforceable once a violation is found?
When the AG reaches a formal resolution — such as a settlement agreement, assurance of discontinuance, consent judgment, or court order — the remedies are legally binding and enforceable.
Are there other administrative processes that must be exhausted before taking legal action?
Not specified in AG materials for civil rights complaints. The AG may refer matters to other agencies if they have primary jurisdiction.
Do state agencies publish complaint outcome data?
The AG’s Office does not maintain a comprehensive public database of all civil rights complaints or education-specific complaint results. However, the AG does publish press releases and public statements for selected high-profile resolutions.
What enforcement mechanisms exist for non-compliance?
If a school district fails to comply with a binding resolution, the AG can enforce terms through (a) initiating court proceedings for violations of a consent judgment or settlement; (b) seeking injunctive relief under the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act (MCRA); or (c) opening a new enforcement action. Remedies can include court orders, further injunctive action, and in some cases monetary penalties or mandated corrective action plans.
State Attorney General Enforcement Actions
-
Has the AG taken civil rights actions involving education in the past 5 years?
In April 2022, the MA AG’s Office issued an advisory reminding schools that all students are entitled to equal access to public education, regardless of immigration status. The advisory emphasizes that school districts and officials in Massachusetts must ensure equal access to public education for all children by: (1) permitting enrollment regardless of race, national origin, or immigration status; (2) avoiding information requests that could discourage or deny access on the basis of these characteristics; and (3) protecting students from bullying and harassment on the basis of these characteristics. Attorney General’s Advisory Regarding Equal Access to Public Education for All Students Irrespective of Immigration Status; see also, https://www.mass.gov/doc/ags-education-guidance-2022/download
In May 2022, following reports of racist, homophobic, and abusive hazing rituals on the Danvers High School varsity hockey team, the MA AG’s Office conducted an investigation and determined the district failed to meet its legal obligations to appropriately address the incidents. In a May 2022 resolution agreement, the district committed to wide-ranging reforms, including reviewing and revising policies, implementing staff training, adding curriculum on diversity and inclusion, and submitting regular compliance reports to the AG’s Office. (AG’s Office Reaches Resolution With Danvers Public School District in Response to Hate and Bias Incidents)
On December 22, 2022, then MA AG Maura Healey co-led a coalition of 20 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Sargent v. School District of Philadelphia, supporting the School District of Philadelphia’s race-neutral admissions plan for selective high schools. The brief argued that the district’s revised, lottery-based process—designed to reduce barriers and increase access for students from diverse backgrounds—was lawful and did not intentionally discriminate against any group. The coalition emphasized the importance of policies that promote equitable access to public education for all students. (AG Healey Co-Leads Court Brief in Support of Equity in School Admissions; see also, https://www.mass.gov/doc/sargent-v-school-district-of-philadelphia-amicus-brief/download )
In July 2024, in response to reports of racist bullying — including an incident described as a “mock slave auction” — the AG’s Office worked with the Southwick-Tolland-Granville Regional School District to create a 12-step action plan. The plan requires measures such as independent assessments of the district’s handling of bias incidents, mandatory staff and student training on discrimination and harassment, and mandatory reporting of future hate-based incidents to the AG’s Office. (To reduce racist bullying, Mass. attorney general steps in with action plan for Southwick schools)
On September 19, 2024, MA Governor Maura Healey and AG Andrea Joy Campbell issued updated guidance to K-12 schools on addressing hate and bias-motivated incidents. The guidance reminds schools of their legal obligation to promptly investigate and respond to all alleged harassment or bullying, and also highlights the importance of proactive measures to foster positive school climates and prevent hate and bias incidents. Additionally, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education awarded over $338,000 in Hate Crime Prevention grants to eight school districts to support these efforts. (Governor Healey, Attorney General Campbell Issue Guidance on Addressing Hate and Bias in K-12 Schools; see also, https://www.mass.gov/doc/guidance-on-schools-legal-obligations-to-prevent-and-address-hate-and-bias-incidents-sept-2024/download)
On February 27, 2025, MA Governor Maura Healey and AG Campbell issued joint guidance reaffirming Massachusetts's commitment to equal access to education, encouraging schools and higher education institutions to continue promoting diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility within the law.(Governor Healey and Attorney General Campbell Issue Joint Guidance Affirming Commitment to Equal Access to Education in Massachusetts)
On March 13, 2025, AG Campbell co-led a coalition of 21 attorneys general in suing the Trump Administration over its attempt to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education. The lawsuit argued that the administration lacked the authority to abolish a congressionally established department or override the statutory responsibilities required of it, and that such actions would severely disrupt educational services nationwide. (AG Campbell Sues Trump Administration Over Unlawful Efforts To Dismantle Department Of Education; see also, https://www.mass.gov/doc/department-of-education-lawsuit/download)
On April 25, 2025, MA AG Andrea Joy Campbell joined a coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Department of Education’s threat to withhold federal funding from state and local agencies that refuse to abandon lawful programs and policies related to diversity, equity, and inclusion. In filing the lawsuit, AG Campbell and the coalition argue that the directive of the U.S. Department of Education was unlawful and jeopardized essential educational funding, particularly for vulnerable student populations, and seek to bar the U.S. Department of Education from withholding any funding based on unlawful conditions. ( AG Campbell Sues Trump Administration For Threatening To Withhold Education Funding Over Diversity, Equity, And Inclusion Initiatives; see also, https://www.mass.gov/doc/department-of-education-grants-complaint/download)
On July 25, 2025, MA AG Andrea Joy Campbell released a statement after the U.S. Department of Education announced it would be releasing the vast majority of the $6.8 billion in education grants for six longstanding programs that it had previously withheld. This decision followed legal action and advocacy by AG Campbell, 23 other attorneys general, and two governors. The withheld funds included over $107 million in funding for critical K-12 and adult education programs in Massachusetts. AG Campbell affirmed her commitment to “continue to hold the Trump Administration accountable when it violates our laws and harms our residents, including our children.” AG Campbell Releases Statement After Department of Education Commits to Releasing Billions in Illegally Withheld Education Grants
In August 2024, advocacy organizations, including Massachusetts Advocates for Children, filed a complaint with the AG’s Office alleging that Saugus Public Schools’ admissions policy barred enrollment for students whose families were not listed in the town census and imposed strict residency documentation requirements. The complaint claims the policy disproportionately impacts immigrant and mixed-status families. (Urging Saugus Schools to Change Exclusionary Admission Policies) As of August 2025, Saugus Public Schools has revised its student admissions policy to eliminate provisions that unlawfully limited access to public education for immigrant families and other vulnerable students with oversight from the AG’s Office. (Back-to School Victory for Families: Saugus Ends Discriminatory School Enrollment Policy After Legal/Civil Rights Challenge)
What enforcement powers does the AG possess in education-related cases?
The MA AG’s enforcement powers in education-related cases include investigating complaints, issuing guidance, bringing lawsuits for injunctive and monetary relief, and collaborating with other agencies to ensure compliance with civil rights and anti-discrimination laws. These powers are exercised through statutory authority, regulatory oversight, and direct legal action.
Under Massachusetts Civil Rights Act (MCRA), M.G.L. c. 12, § 11H, the AG can address violations where individuals or entities interfere with others’ constitutional or legal rights through threats, intimidation, or coercion. The AG may file civil actions seeking injunctive or equitable relief, compensatory damages, litigation costs, attorney’s fees, and civil penalties up to $5,000 per violation.
The AG’s Civil Rights Division investigates complaints of discrimination in public education based on race, national origin, gender, religion, disability, and other protected categories. Upon finding violations, the AG can initiate enforcement actions under state and federal laws.
Does the AG accept individual education civil rights complaints, or does the office only take on broad investigations? (if they do individual complaints, would want to answer the below complaint process questions for the AG’s office)
The Civil Rights Division of the AG’s office accepts individual civil rights complaints in education in addition to conducting broad investigations. Members of the public, including students, parents, or advocates, can file complaints alleging discrimination or other civil rights violations in public education settings.
-
Does the AG have an office/section dedicated to education or education civil rights issues? (If the AG has sections or offices dedicated to education or children's rights issues, please identify that office when responding to relevant questions above and with respect to the complaint process below.)
The Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office addresses education and education-related civil rights issues through its Civil Rights Division.
This division is responsible for enforcing state and federal laws that prohibit discrimination in public education on the basis of disability, race, national origin, gender, religion, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, veteran or marital status, and receipt of public assistance.
The division enforces the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act by obtaining civil rights injunctions to protect victims of bias-motivated threats, intimidation, coercion and violence and advocates for civil rights and civil liberties by reviewing policy and legislation and filing amicus briefs in civil rights cases.
Other State Enforcement Systems
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE)
-
Who is eligible to file (students, parents, advocates, others)?
DESE’s Problem Resolution System (PRS) office accepts education-related complaints from anyone, including parents, students, educators, community members, and agency representatives. (Problem Resolution System Office)
Are there other administrative processes someone may have to exhaust before initiating a complaint? (i.e., going through school’s, district’s, or other agency’s process first, etc.)
There is no stated formal “exhaustion” requirement on the PRS intake page (https://www.doe.mass.edu/prs/intake/default.html). Parties are encouraged to continue to work together to resolve their disputes before, during, and after a complaint has been filed with the PRS. If the parties resolve all or a portion of the allegations raised in the complaint prior to PRS issuing a decision, the complainant may withdraw the resolved allegations. Whenever a complainant chooses to withdraw their complaint or some of the allegations made within their complaint, the complainant must contact the assigned PRS Specialist to inform them of the withdrawal.
How to initiate the process (relevant websites, standard forms, submission locations)
Complaints can be filed through an online portal using PRS complaint intake form available in multiple languages.
Complainants may fill out the PRS complaint intake form electronically or on paper, and submit it via email at DESECompliance@mass.gov or by mail to Problem Resolution System Office, Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 135 Santilli Highway, Everett, MA 02149.
Complainants may call 781.338.3700 or email DESECompliance@mass.gov to receive a complaint intake form in any language. PRS staff can also take complaints over the phone in any language.
Can complaints be filed anonymously or confidentially?
The PRS complaint intake form requires the complainant’s full name and contact information. Information related to PRS complaints is stored in an electronic database and those who have access to the electronic database are subject to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Information Security Policies and Standards. (Commonwealth of Massachusetts Information Security Policies and Standards)
PRS will not share personally identifiable student information with a third-party unless PRS has written consent authorizing it to share such information or other documentation entitling the third-party access to otherwise protected information (e.g., in response to a lawfully issued subpoena or judicial court order as permitted under 34 C.F.R. § 99.31(a)(9)(i) and (ii)). For third-party complaints involving a student, written consent from the parent/guardian or adult student is required to release identifying information. Without consent, info will be redacted and in some cases PRS may not provide a written decision to the third-party complainant. (Special Education Complaint Procedures Guide)
Are there language access requirements for complaint processes?
Yes. Complaints may be filed in any language. PRS provides translations and interpreter services, including phone interpreters in 140+ languages. Written responses/decisions will be translated into a complainant’s primary language when known. https://www.doe.mass.edu/prs/intake/default.html; see also, Special Education Complaint Procedures Guide)
Are there known barriers to accessing enforcement (filing fees, documentation requirements)?
No filing fees. While complainants may submit supporting documentation, there is no strict documentation requirement to file. PRS staff can assist individuals unable to submit in writing, including transcription of oral intakes via phone.
Can complainants have advocates or legal representation?
Yes, complainants may have advocates or legal representation.
Are complainants entitled to legal representation or other advocates to file or at any point in the process?
DESE does not provide legal representation through PRS. Individuals may retain their own attorney or work with an advocacy organization if desired.
-
What are the required elements of the civil rights claim?
PRS complaints must be in writing and signed (unless filed online, which acts as an electronic signature), and must include: complainant’s contact information; description of the alleged violation; facts supporting the allegation(s); and, if relating to a specific student, the student’s name, address, current school, and detailed nature of the problem. A proposed resolution should be included when known. For special education complaints ( Special Education Complaint Procedures Guide), the issue must have occurred within one year of filing.
Who reviews claims and what timeframes apply?
Complaints are reviewed and processed by PRS Specialists (DESE staff who provide technical assistance to the public and investigate complaints filed with PRS). Timelines for general education complaints are not specified on the PRS website. PRS must issue a written decision within 60 calendar days of receipt for special education complaints, unless extended for mediation or exceptional circumstances. (Special Education Complaint Procedures Guide)
What type of investigation may occur?
PRS may review records, request information from the district, conduct interviews, issue a Request for Local Response (RLR) (which is a letter issued by the Department to the party against whom the complaint has been filed that provides this party with an opportunity to respond to the complaint, provide a proposal to resolve the complaint (if it chooses to do so), and provide an opportunity for the parties to voluntarily engage in mediation pursuant to 34 C.F.R § 300.152(a)(3)), and assess related policies and practices. On-site visits may occur if necessary.
Who participates in investigations?
PRS Specialists, the complainants (or their representative) and representatives of the district, school, or public agency.
Are complainants entitled to a hearing of any kind? If yes, what are complainants entitled to during the hearing?
PRS complaints are resolved through an administrative investigation process; there is no provision for a formal evidentiary hearing for complainants. Individuals seeking a hearing in special education disputes can seek a due process hearing with the Bureau of Special Education Appeals (BSEA).
What privacy/confidentiality protections exist?
PRS will not share personally identifiable student information with a third-party unless PRS has written consent authorizing it to share such information or other documentation entitling the third-party access to otherwise protected information (e.g., in response to a lawfully issued subpoena or judicial court order as permitted under 34 C.F.R. § 99.31(a)(9)(i) and (ii)).
If a third party files without written consent from the parent/guardian or adult student, PRS will redact identifying information in correspondence and may not share the decision with the third-party complainant if redaction cannot protect student identity.
Are school districts required to publicly post civil rights complaint procedures?
While DESE’s PRS guidelines do not explicitly require school districts to public ally post PRS complaint procedures, 603 CMR, § 26.08 ( 603 CMR, § 26.08 - Notification and Complaint Procedure) requires Massachusetts public schools to annually publish and distribute their non-discrimination policy and procedures for handling related complaints to students, parents, and staff, and provide them in the primary language of parents/students upon request.
-
What is the appeals process, if any?
PRS decisions are final and may not be appealed. However, either or both of the parties may seek mediation or a due process hearing through the Bureau of Special Education Appeals (BSEA) on the same issues addressed by PRS. A due process hearing would be a new proceeding and not for the purpose of reviewing PRS’s decision. However, the BSEA’s due process hearing decision would be binding on the parties and may be appealed. ( Special Education Complaint Procedures Guide)
Are remedies legally enforceable once a violation is found?
PRS can require Corrective Action Orders that districts must complete within specified timelines — no later than one year after identification of noncompliance. DESE monitors compliance and can require additional steps if corrective actions are not implemented satisfactorily.
Are there other administrative processes that must be exhausted before taking legal action?
PRS does not require that its process be exhausted before initiating legal action or filing with another agency.
Do state agencies publish complaint outcome data?
DESE does not maintain a public database of all PRS complaint decisions. DESE publishes quarterly reports aggregating certain state complaint data metrics in response to the monitoring activities conducted by the United States Department of Education's Office of Special Education Programs.
What enforcement mechanisms exist for non-compliance?
To enforce the ordered corrective action, the PRS Specialist may provide technical assistance, issue order(s), issue additional corrective action(s), and/or take other actions necessary to achieve compliance. To verify the correction of non-compliance, PRS may take steps such as conducting a review of the records, data files, and other sources of reliable information to verify correction. . Ultimately, if PRS has not verified that the noncompliance has been corrected within the one-year timeline, PRS will not close the original finding and may impose additional corrective actions and/or pursue enforcement actions, as it deems necessary.
Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD)
-
The MCAD enforces M.G.L. c. 151C which makes it illegal to deny admission to a Massachusetts-based educational institution, such as a college or university, based on the applicant's membership in a protected class.
The MCAD website provides an online questionnaire to determine whether or not a complainant is ready to file a complaint of discrimination at the MCAD or if there is another action that is more appropriate at this time. (File a Complaint of Discrimination at the MCAD) The questionnaire allows the complainant to select if they are filing a complaint for themselves, on behalf of a minor child, an adult in the complainant’s care, or an estate, or as an attorney or duly authorized representative (DAR) filing for someone else.
Filings of complaints of discrimination within 300 days of the last discriminatory act (or with 6 months for higher education admission complaints).
If a complainant is eligible and ready to file a complaint of discrimination at MCAD, they can schedule an intake interview with an investigator to file a complaint through one of the following options. (https://www.mass.gov/how-to/schedule-an-intake-appointment-with-an-investigator )
In Person:
Visiting an MCAD office is the quickest option for getting an intake interview and filing a complaint.
Intake services are offered on a first come, first served basis.
Individuals seeking to file a complaint of discrimination can come in-person to MCAD Boston, Springfield, and Worcester offices for intake services. In-person video-conferencing kiosks are available in each office to file complaints. Intakes may also be conducted by phone from a private intake room in an MCAD office.
The first intake appointment starts at 9:15 am and the last intake appointment starts at 2:45 pm each weekday (Monday to Friday).
Most individuals will complete an intake interview on the day they visit an MCAD office. In the rare instances that all appointments for the day are full, MCAD’s administrative staff will schedule an intake for next available in-office or virtual appointment, which may be as soon as the following day, or when it is most convenient for the person wishing to file.
MCAD Boston Headquarters, 1 Ashburton Place, Ste. 601, Boston, MA 02108 Monday – Friday: 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
MCAD Worcester Office, 18 Chestnut Street, Rm. 520, Worcester, MA 01608 Monday – Friday: 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
MCAD Springfield Office, 436 Dwight Street, Rm. 220, Springfield, MA 01103 Monday – Friday: 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
Online:
Individuals have the option to file a complaint by scheduling a virtual intake, which are completed using Zoom or if necessary by phone call.
MCAD’s online scheduling system allows MCAD to book up to 90 days out for intake appointments on a first come first served basis. If there are no available appointments, please check back after 3:00pm of the same day or before 9:00am the next day to see if new appointments are available.
IMPORTANT: The scheduling system does not allow for appointments to be scheduled more than 90 days out. If the system is showing “no appointments available,” it is because all available intake time slots for the next 90 days have been scheduled.
Individuals who are having difficulty finding an appointment through the online system and are within their 300-day/6-month filing deadline should visit one of our offices (the fastest option) or call 617-994-6000. Individuals who are within 72 hours of their 300-day/6-month deadline should call 617-994-6000 to receive priority for emergency intake appointments.
All questions about scheduling and intake appointments should be sent to MCADIntakeSchedule@mass.gov.
Complainants can note any need for accommodation when scheduling an intake appointment.
To make an intake appointment, complainants can use the agency’s online scheduling system: https://mcad.appointlet.com/.
By Mail:
Individuals have the option to file a complaint of discrimination by mail, though it is strongly encouraged that individuals file a complaint in-person or virtually by using Zoom for our intake specialists to provide assistance.
Instructions and detailed requirements for submitting a mail-in complaint.
If choosing to submit a mail-in complaint, the complainants should send it to: MCAD Boston Headquarters, 1 Ashburton Place, Ste. 601, Boston, MA 02108
-
Anyone may file a discrimination complaint if they feel they have been treated differently or unfairly when applying for admission to an educational institution based on their membership in a protected class, such as race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, disability, sex, age, sexual orientation, familial status, veteran status, criminal record, and gender identity/expression. (MCAD Rules of Procedure 804 CMR 1.00 (2020))
Complaint Authorization & Serving of the Complaint
When a complaint is filed, it may require additional review to determine if the MCAD has jurisdiction over the claims in the complaint. Once the complaint is authorized, formal investigation of the case begins by first serving the official MCAD complaint on both the complainant (individual who filed the complaint) and the respondent(s) (individual and/or organization alleged to have discriminated against the complainant) parties.
An MCAD Investigator is assigned to the case to gather information throughout the investigative process by interviewing witnesses, obtaining relevant documentation, conducting site visits, and additional methods as necessary.
Position Statement & Rebuttal
Once the complaint is mailed to the respondent(s), they then have an opportunity to reply to the statements in the complaint by submitting a position statement in writing. The position statement is sent to the MCAD and to the complainant.
After receiving the position statement, the complainant has the option to submit a written rebuttal to the statements made in the position statement.
Investigative Conference
Sometimes, the assigned MCAD Investigator will hold a virtual meeting with both parties to ask questions and gather additional information. Investigative conferences typically last 15-20 minutes and are not a formal hearing.
Early Mediation
Early Mediation is a voluntary service offered by the MCAD’s Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Unit to resolve disputes and reach settlements for the MCAD case ahead of a determination. If the case reaches a settlement in early mediation, the case is closed at the MCAD and does not proceed further. (MCAD Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR))
Determination & Investigative Disposition
After thorough investigation, the Investigating Commissioner assigned to the case will make a determination that is sent to the parties in writing as an investigative disposition. The investigative disposition explains the legal reasoning as to whether there is enough evidence to support that it is more likely than not that unlawful discrimination has occurred. An investigative disposition will have one of three determinations:
Probable Cause (PC): This means that the MCAD has found sufficient evidence to support a preliminary conclusion that unlawful discrimination may have occurred.
Lack of Probable Cause (LOPC): This means that the MCAD has not found sufficient evidence to support a preliminary conclusion that unlawful discrimination may have occurred.
Lack of Jurisdiction (LOJ): This means that the MCAD has found that it does not have legal authority over the allegations of discrimination.
Appealing a Determination (File a Motion to Amend, Appeal, Remove, or Withdraw an MCAD Case)
If the Investigating Commissioner made a determination of lack of probable cause or lack of jurisdiction, the complainant has the right to appeal the determination within 10 days of receiving the investigative disposition. The Investigating Commissioner, or their designee, will hold a “preliminary hearing" where the complainant has an opportunity to explain why they believe the determination was incorrect. Based on the results of the preliminary hearing, the Investigating Commissioner may:
Send the case back to the MCAD Investigations Unit for further investigation;
Reverse the finding by issuing a probable cause determination; or
Uphold the original determination. If the determination is upheld, the case is closed and does not proceed further at the MCAD.
If the Investigating Commissioner made a determination of probable cause, the respondent has the right to file a motion for reconsideration with the MCAD Clerk's Office and the MCAD Office of the General Counsel. In most cases, the respondent(s) can make a motion for reconsideration of a probable cause determination at any time before the case is certified to public hearing.
Conciliation
Conciliation is mandatory and is offered after a probable cause determination has been made by the Investigating Commissioner. As required by the MCAD's governing statute, M.G.L. c. 151B, all parties and counsel are required to attend the conciliation. If a complainant does not have private counsel, the Commission will assign MCAD Commission Counsel to the case. In conciliation, an MCAD Mediator attempts to achieve a just resolution of the case and to obtain assurances that the respondent(s) will satisfactorily remedy any violations of the rights of the complainant, and take action to assure the elimination of discriminatory practices—or the prevention of their occurrence—in the future.
If the case reaches a settlement in conciliation, the case is closed at the MCAD and does not proceed further.
Discovery & Certification of Issues
When a case does not settle in conciliation, the parties are given an opportunity to conduct discovery, pursuant to 804 CMR 1.10 (2020). The parties will receive a discovery order from the Commission that sets a timeframe for them to gather even more information on the case before the case is certified for a public hearing. Permitted discovery may include, but is not limited to, interrogatories to parties, requests for production of documents, papers, or other tangible things, depositions, subpoenas, and site visits.
Then, the Investigating Commissioner will determine if there is enough public interest to certify the case to public hearing. The Investigating Commissioner may issue the certification order sua sponte (taking the action by the Commission’s own accord) or after holding a certification conference. Notification of the certification conference scheduling will be served to both parties and counsel, along with a request for written submissions ahead of the certification conference. At the conference, the Investigating Commissioner will consider which issues, matters, and questions of law will be certified to bring to public hearing. The Investigating Commissioner also addresses matters that may lead to a denial of certification and/or a reversal of the case’s probable cause preliminary determination during the conference. For more information on the certification of issues to public hearing, please reference 804 CMR 1.11 (2020).
Pre-Public Hearing
The pre-public hearing stage is the period after a case has been certified to public hearing, but before the public hearing takes place. This stage has various purposes including ensuring that certified cases make timely progress towards a public hearing and narrowing disputes so that the parties can focus on the key issues in dispute at the public hearing. Typical events in the pre-hearing stage include a status conference, filing of a joint pre-hearing memorandum, and one or more pre-hearing conferences.
At a status conference, the following issues are typically addressed:
Who are the parties?
What issues were certified to public hearing?
Have the parties discussed settlement?
Is discovery complete?
Are there pending motions?
Do the parties anticipate filing any motions before public hearing?
What type of relief is Complainant seeking at the public hearing?
How many days will the public hearing last?
Is an interpreter necessary for the public hearing?
A pre-hearing order typically requires that counsel confer with each other and file a joint pre-hearing memorandum that shall contain:
The contact information for counsel and for the parties.
What each party expects the evidence to show at the hearing as to liability and damages.
Stipulations (agreements) that the parties have reached.
Name and nature of testimony for non-expert witnesses.
For proposed expert witnesses: subject matter of testimony, substance of facts and opinions, summary of grounds for each opinion, and the expert’s curriculum vitae.
A description of the relief that complainant seeks at the hearing.
Whether a party is requesting certain witnesses be sequestered at hearing (meaning they cannot hear opening statements or testimony of other witnesses until after testifying themselves).
Motions (and associated material such as opposition) that may be addressed before hearing.
Whether an interpreter is needed at the hearing.
Whether a stenographer will be present at the hearing.
An estimate of the length of the hearing.
Requirements for filing proposed hearing exhibits including redaction requirements.
The issues addressed at the pre-hearing conference(s) are varied and may include as examples:
What documents do the parties agree should be admitted as exhibits at the hearing?
What documents do the parties disagree as to whether they should become exhibits?
Addressing outstanding motions.
Addressing whether parties can narrow the number of disputes.
Refinement of the number of days necessary for the hearing.
Refinement of the number of witnesses at the hearing.
Questions that counsel or parties have regarding the hearing.
Public Hearing (MCAD Public Hearings)
The MCAD holds public hearings pursuant to M.G.L. c. 151B, § 5, M.G.L. c. 30A, and 804 CMR 1.12 (2020) conducted by an MCAD Hearing Commissioner or MCAD Hearing Officer (presiding officer). The parties make opening statements regarding what they believe the evidence will show. Parties have the right to call and examine witnesses under oath, to introduce exhibits, to cross-examine witnesses, and to submit rebuttal evidence. The presiding officer rules on objections and determines what testimony is admissible and what documents are admitted into evidence as exhibits. The presiding officer is not bound by the rules of evidence observed by courts but is bound by the rules of privilege (for example: the attorney-client privilege). Only information admitted into evidence at the public hearing can be considered by the presiding officer when rendering a hearing decision.
-
Privacy & Protective Orders
A party may move for a protective order to prevent public disclosure of information at the public hearing or in the record of the public hearing for good cause shown. The Presiding Officer may allow such motion if it is in the public interest. A protective order may provide for the exclusion, limitation, redaction or impoundment of documentary or testimonial evidence at the hearing or in the hearing record, 804 CMR 1.12(9) (2020).
Documents must not contain personal data identifiers unless it is necessary. If filing such identifiers is necessary, a party must redact them as described in 804 CMR 1.21(4-5) (2020). Protected personal data identifiers include: (a) Social Security, Taxpayer Identification, Driver's License, State-issued Identification Card and Passport numbers; (b) Names of Minor Children; (c) Dates of Birth; (d) Financial Account, Credit Card and Debit Card numbers; (e) Medical Record numbers; and (f) Mother's Maiden Name.
MCAD Hearing Decisions
After a public hearing, the parties each file a post-hearing brief. A post-hearing brief contains proposed findings of fact and proposed conclusions of law, 804 CMR 1.12(16) (2020).
The Presiding Officer reviews the admitted testimony, exhibits and post-hearing briefs and issues a written Hearing Decision that contains the findings of fact and conclusions of law necessary to address the issues certified to public hearing or addressed at the public hearing, and when applicable, determines appropriate remedies, 804 CMR 1.12(18) (2020).
If, upon all the evidence at the public hearing, the Presiding Officer finds that a respondent(s) has engaged in an unlawful practice as defined in M.G.L. c. 151B, § 4 or has violated any other law(s) under the MCAD’s authority, the Presiding Officer shall issue an order requiring such respondent to cease and desist from such unlawful practice or violation. In addition, the Presiding Officer shall take such action, (e.g. awarding monetary damages, equitable relief), as in its judgment, will effectuate the purposes of such laws. If, upon all the evidence at the public hearing, the Presiding Officer finds that a respondent(s) has not engaged in an unlawful practice or violation, the complaint against such respondent(s) shall be dismissed.
The Hearing Decision notifies the parties of their rights to appeal the Hearing Decision, 804 CMR 1.12(18) (2020).
Appeals
Complainants may file an appeal for a Lack of Probable Cause determination within 10 days of receiving the notice in favor of the Respondent.
A party aggrieved by the Hearing Decision may appeal the decision to the MCAD Full Commission. To do so, the party must file a Notice of Appeal within ten days of receipt of the Hearing Decision and file a Petition for Review within thirty days of receipt of the Hearing Decision, 804 CMR 1.23 (2020).
If a party files a Petition for Review, each of the other parties has the right to file a Notice of Intervention within ten days of receipt of the Petition for Review and shall file a brief in reply to the Petition for Review within thirty days of receipt of the Petition for Review, 804 CMR 1.23 (2020).

