What Matters Most in Order to Realize Positive Outcomes for Students With Disabilities?

September 16, 2025

By Rorie Fitzpatrick and Michele Rovins

The purpose of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is compelling: to ensure that children and youth with disabilities receive the early intervention and special education services they need to thrive from birth through high school graduation and to be ready for postschool success. But a look at national outcomes data shows there is room for systemic improvement in order to truly meet the charge.

So, what will it take to sustain positive outcomes where they do exist while also increasing outcomes for preK–12 students who are not realizing academic and behavioral success at desired depths and speeds?

In an era of federal flexibility and increasing appreciation for state-led prioritization, special education directors and their teams, in partnership with policymakers, families, and other interest holders, have new opportunities to prioritize decision-making and implement solutions that can have the largest impact in genuinely realizing success for students with disabilities.

We suggest state and local leaders prioritize the five key constructs below. At the surface level, they may not seem new or innovative, but a deeper look at the details suggests that they could make a significant difference in the lives of students with disabilities.

• Accurately identify and make students eligible for special education services.
• Develop outcomes-focused Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) such that services are configured to ensure educational benefit.
• Provide specially designed instruction with fidelity, as specified in students’ IEPs.
• Promote meaningful family–educator–principal partnerships that result in the functional application of procedural safeguards for student and family rights.
• Design and implement an efficient and effective statewide system of General Supervision and strategic resource allocation to drive accountability and support that propels excellence in the priorities listed above.

Identification and Eligibility

IDEA expects that special education be provided to students who have neurological and/or physical needs that can’t be met with typical supports. Identification rates vary so widely across districts and across states that one can’t help but wonder if special education is sometimes the only option to try to help a student who is struggling. Research shows us that when schools implement functional, multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) with fidelity, they are more likely to use data to make accurate decisions about student eligibility.

Special education is not the only form of academic and behavioral support in such schools, and therefore it is not the only solution for addressing students’ needs. Key to such systems is the commitment to gather, analyze, and, most importantly, meaningfully interrogate and use student-level data to understand why a child might be struggling and whether special education is truly the most suitable intervention. Historically common data (e.g., academic performance) remain key, but so do less frequently used data such as attendance and chronic absenteeism, the quality of core instruction (especially in light of the pandemic aftermath), and access to qualified educators in a time of high personnel shortages.

Outcomes-Focused IEPs

Designing IEPs to support meaningful outcomes likely requires teams to think about educational benefit in a fundamentally different way—shifting from a focus on merely meeting compliance requirements to genuinely enhancing students’ educational experiences and outcomes through clear, measurable goals and supports that define what educational benefit means for each student.

This approach requires collaborative planning that starts with the end in mind and ensures learning conditions (personnel, accommodations, placement, related services) that support attainment of grade-level standards. Goals should be meaningful and relevant to the student’s interests, strengths, and aspirations; account for academics and well-being; and enable success beyond school through further education and/or employment. Measurability should be designed to effectively track progress and inform adjustments to the plan.

Implement Services With Fidelity

Providing specially designed instruction with fidelity, as specified in students’ IEPs, means implementing the instructional strategies and supports outlined in the IEP accurately and consistently to ensure that each student receives the intended educational benefits. Doing so requires all educators serving a student to understand that student’s unique needs, strengths, and challenges; to have detailed knowledge of their specified accommodations, modifications, and goals; and to consistently implement those services as designed.

Incumbent to such efforts is a need for appropriate, effective professional learning so that educators are trained and equipped with the skills necessary to deliver specially designed instruction effectively and to collaborate and communicate with other educators and families. Regularly monitoring and assessing student progress toward IEP goals—using data and observations to determine the effectiveness of instruction and making necessary adjustments to maintain fidelity—is essential.

Functional Application of Procedural Safeguards

Providing copies of their rights to parents of children with disabilities and explaining them at annual meetings has long held sway as the standard that school staff must meet. But this approach seems limited in focus.

A better approach is effective collaboration that enables educators, parents, and students to determine students’ needs and the services that would meet those needs in order to bring meaningful educational benefit. This approach requires authentic teacher, principal, and parent communication and intentional professional learning and support for educators.

General Supervision and Strategic Resource Allocation

State education agencies (SEAs) are responsible for monitoring local-level implementation of IDEA and supporting improvement when needed. Data collection, analysis, and use are at the heart of this effort. If states had more flexibility to determine what to focus upon in these efforts, they could concentrate on determining the extent to which students were experiencing real educational benefit based on whether they were advancing in meeting or exceeding grade level standards, demonstrating readiness for postschool success, or successfully engaging with peers in socially appropriate ways.

One approach SEAs could take to use their resources most effectively is a “loose–tight” orientation. In this approach, they are “tight” on outcomes—setting the bar for nonnegotiables and making expectations clear. On the “loose” side, they empower local systems to meet expectations in ways that match community needs. The state then measures success against mandates and provides more flexibility to those local agencies (school districts, charter schools) that are meeting expectations and provides increased oversight and support to those that are not. This orientation would require states to consider what they might measure differently, what they could do with relevant data to encourage improvement, and how they would resource what matters most.

To address what matters most, state leaders need to make decisions about issues including the following: how to engage meaningfully with parents, policymakers, and communities; what data are most useful for understanding needs and prioritizing solutions; how to plan for and execute innovative strategies that align with data-driven priorities; and how to rethink strategic resource allocation and management, including assessing returns on investment and working to continuously improve.

About Our Authors

Rorie Fitzpatrick is Vice President of K–12 Systems at WestEd, leading efforts for quality assurance, talent development, eminence and visibility, and business development for a portfolio of work focused on building and sustaining student-centered systems at local, state, and national levels. She is also Director of the National Center for Systemic Improvement (NCSI), a large-scale technical assistance center that builds capacity for SEAs to implement strong general supervision systems, lead effective instruction, and succeed with organizational design and talent management and retention.

Michele Rovins is Senior Director of Special Education Policy and Practice at WestEd. Rovins directs the development and expansion of services to support clients in building educational systems that advance opportunities for students to succeed and leads the team in building effective systems and communities nationwide that improve outcomes for students with disabilities.