Standards of Excellence for Outcome Based Contracting: High-Dosage Tutoring

Standards of Excellence for
Outcome Based Contracting™: High-Dosage Tutoring

Quick Navigation

Introduction – Start of a Movement
Five Domains of Outcomes Based Contracting
Understanding the Center for OBC Standards of Excellence
Standards of Excellence Resources
Glossary of Terms

Start of a Movement

The Center for Outcomes Based Contracting Standards of Excellence embody the foundational principles and concepts of outcomes based contracting (OBC), serving as the cornerstone for all related training, tools, and resources. The Standards establish clear benchmarks for outcomes based contracting across the K–12 landscape, balancing the need for robust support with accountability for maintaining high-quality contracts that drive meaningful outcomes for districts, educators, and students.

The OBC Standards of Excellence are designed to:

Promote Consistency: Set clear, uniform expectations for OBC, ensuring the presence of critical contract components.
Ensure Quality: Provide a rigorous framework to ensure outcomes based contracts are thoughtfully designed, high-quality, and aligned with best practices.
Foster Efficiency: Provide a clear and efficient framework that streamlines the development of high-quality, well-defined contracts and enables scalability.

These Standards are essential for driving impactful, scalable, and sustainable improvements across the K–12 education ecosystem. They will help LEAs, ESAs, SEAs, providers, and any organizations that support them create outcomes based contracts that are clear, thorough, and designed to achieve student outcomes.

Five Domains of Outcomes Based Contracting

DOMAIN

DESCRIPTION

RATIONALE

Clearly Defined Population

Learn More

The contract defines the population served, specifying the content area, grade level, and like-performing student group (defined by one or more quantitative criteria).

Aligning implementation with the research base and tracking participation and outcomes for a specific, clearly defined population of schools, students, and/or teachers is essential for measuring impact, allocating resources effectively, and ultimately achieving desired student outcomes.

Domain 1: Clearly Defined Population

The contract defines the population served, specifying the content area, grade level, and like-performing student group (defined by one or more quantitative criteria).

Standard 1:
Target Student Population

The contract clearly describes the target student population.

Indicators:

1.1 Target Population

Specifies a group of like-performing students who need additional support in the focus area based on grade level, subject area, historical performance, and any other relevant identifiers (e.g., first language, IEP status)

1.2 Historical Performance Data

Provides historical baseline data (using the same or a proxy assessment tool) to describe baseline performance for the targeted student group.

1.3 Student Identification Criteria

Identifies assessment, metric(s) / criteria, and performance thresholds that will be used to identify like-performing students.

1.4 Population Size Estimate

States the estimated number of students intended to be served (from the like-performing population)

Standard 2:
Program Description

The contract includes a program description.

Indicators:

2.1 Research-Based Intervention

Identifies a tutoring intervention consistent with the research base about effective practices for high-dosage tutoring, e.g., group size; tutor consistency; frequency / duration; schedule; tutor preparation and coaching / development; data-informed; material / curriculum quality, rigor, and alignment

2.2 Aligned Implementation

Articulates intention to use and implement the intervention in alignment with the research base and best practices associated with demonstrated impact for the product

2.3 District Strategic Alignment

Articulates alignment with long-term district priorities, goals, and strategy

2.4 Implementation Timeline

Outlines intervention timeline consistent with research demonstrating impact, including the duration and planned start / end dates

Clearly Defined Outcomes and Metrics

Learn More

The contract includes clear outcome definitions – determined by the district – with associated measures and achievement goals specific to the target population.

Clear outcome definitions and measurement processes help ensure that interventions deliver meaningful results. Identifying outcomes that are meaningful (important to the district), malleable (able to be impacted by the intervention), and measurable (feasible to be accurately monitored to assess progress and attainment) enables districts to track progress effectively, make informed decisions, and hold providers accountable for delivering results that matter for students.

Domain 2: Clearly Defined Outcomes and Metrics

The contract includes clear outcome definitions – determined by the district – with associated measures and achievement goals specific to the target population.

Standard 3:
Measurable Outcomes and Metrics

The contract includes measurable, research-backed outcomes and metrics.

Indicators:

3.1 Achievement Metric

3.2 Growth Metric

Provides historical baseline data (using the same or a proxy assessment tool) to describe baseline performance for the targeted student group.

3.3 Meaningful Outcomes

Identifies assessment, metric(s) / criteria, and performance thresholds that will be used to identify like-performing students.

3.4 Malleable Outcomes

States the estimated number of students intended to be served (from the like-performing population)

3.5 Measurable Outcomes

All contract outcomes and metrics are measurable, i.e., feasible to be accurately monitored to assess progress and attainment

3.6 Assessment Diversity

Outcomes and metrics leverage valid, reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive assessments from multiple sources to provide a more complete picture of student performance and protect against gaps and biases

The contract includes expectations, processes, and timelines for data collection and sharing.

Indicators:

4.1 Data Collection Timeline

Articulates timelines for assessment administration, data reporting/sharing, and payment for each outcome-metric pair, including process outcomes

4.2 Data Collection Responsibilities

Indicates individuals responsible for assessment administration, data reporting/sharing, and payment for each outcome-metric pair, including process outcomes

2.3 District Strategic Alignment

Articulates alignment with long-term district priorities, goals, and strategy

2.4 Implementation Timeline

Outlines intervention timeline consistent with research demonstrating impact, including the duration and planned start / end dates

Contingent Outcomes Payments

Learn More

The contract articulates a financial structure including payments that are earned only as the agreed-upon outcomes are achieved.

Establishing a financial structure that directly links payment to student success, with at least 40% of the contract value contingent on student outcomes, creates meaningful incentives for achievement while maintaining sufficient funding for quality implementation. This framework provides financial clarity and predictability for both districts and providers while maintaining focus on individual student achievement rather than aggregate outcomes.

Domain 3: Contingent Outcomes Payments

The contract articulates a financial structure including payments that are earned only as the agreed-upon outcomes are achieved.

Standard 5:
Payment Structure

The contract includes a per-student base payment.

Indicators:

5.1 Student-Based Pricing

Specifies per-student base price, i.e., not class-, school-/site-, or district-based pricing

5.2 All-Inclusive Pricing Structure

Specifies inclusive pricing, i.e., no additional line items for professional learning, project management, curriculum development, etc.

5.3 Implementation Price

Contract price (base + contingent payments) accounts for services required (per the research base) to enable fidelity of implementation and does not require additional payments or inputs in order to produce the outcomes

5.4 Outcome Cap Scaling

Specifies that the base payment and outcome caps are scaled based on the total number of rostered students

Standard 6:
Contingent Payments

The contract articulates a structure for payments contingent on outcomes.

Indicators:

6.1 Payment Contingency Requirement

At least 40% of the total contract value is contingent on student outcomes

6.2 Individual Outcomes Based Payment

Specifies that contingent payments will be made based on the attainment of individual student outcomes

6.3 Payment Definitions

Defines key terms, including base payment, payment outcomes, process outcomes, contingent payments, price per outcome, and outcome payment cap

6.4 Maximum Payment Specification

Specifies maximum potential payment

Standard 7:
Rate Card

The contract includes a completed rate card.

Indicators:

7.1 Payment Outcomes

Rate card includes 2-5 payment outcomes, including middle-of-year and end-of-year payment outcomes (for year-long interventions)

7.2 Rate Card Structure

Rate card includes clearly-defined outcome and metric pairs with per-student price and outcome cap for each

7.3 Budget Alignment Payment Definitions

Sum of the individual outcome caps is equal to the total budget

7.4 Base Payment Capum Payment Specification

Base payment outcome cap is equal to the per-student base payment multiplied by the number of students served

7.5 Outcome Cap Limits

Outcome caps are no greater than the per-student outcome price multiplied by the number of students served

7.6 Non-Exclusive Outcomes

Outcome-metric pairs are not mutually exclusive, i.e., each outcome can be achieved by every student. For example, if using multiple growth outcomes, one outcome might be “typical+” and another outcome might be “high”; if using multiple proficiency outcomes, one outcome might be “meets expectations+” and another might be “exceeds expectations”

Mutual Accountability

Learn More

The contract includes agreed-upon commitments made between a district and provider, ensuring each party is responsible for the achievement of student outcomes.

Successful implementation depends on clear, shared responsibilities between the district and provider. A comprehensive framework for mutual accountability that defines specific obligations, remedies, and processes ensures that both districts and providers have concrete responsibilities for creating the conditions necessary for student success, with clear remedies when expectations aren’t met.

Domain 4: Mutual Accountability

The contract includes agreed-upon commitments made between a district and provider, ensuring each party is responsible for the achievement of student outcomes.

Standard 8:
Minimum Service Requirements

The contract includes minimum service requirements for all parties.

Indicators:

8.1 Student Attendance

Articulates minimum attendance requirements for participating students and the district’s responsibility to ensure it is met, e.g., 70% attendance over the duration of the contract (based on the research about effective high-dosage tutoring)

8.2 Consistent Tutor

Specifies the provider’s responsibility to ensure tutor consistency, e.g., that students have the same tutor for at least 80% of tutoring sessions any adjustments to groupings occur sparingly and strategically (based on the research about effective high-dosage tutoring)

8.3 Platform Access Requirements

If necessary, specifies requirements for accessing the platform (detailed information on required hardware, software, peripherals, bandwidth, etc.) and the district’s responsibility to ensure requirements are met

Outlines data sharing between district and provider for key elements, including district data that enables the provision of instructionally appropriate content for students and provider data that enables continuous improvement

8.5 Implementation Success Plan

Includes initial provider-developed implementation success plan that outlines the activities needed to support and drive implementation consistent with research-based best practices (including but not limited to professional learning, frequency of data / report review, ongoing coaching, on-demand resources, tech support, and continuous improvement) and all parties’ responsibilities for completing these activities

8.6 Progress Monitoring Reports

8.7 Technical Requirements

If necessary, specifies requirements for platform performance (platform uptime and operational status, single sign-on and user verification, SIS and LMS interoperability, system performance and response time, data encryption and cyber protection, and support response time) and the provider’s responsibility to ensure requirements are met

8.8 Support Timeline

If necessary, specifies a timeframe for when the provider will deliver technical support when issues arise with the platform.

8.9 Roster Finalization Timeline

Specifies a timeline during initial stages of implementation for finalizing the participating student roster and computing associated base payment

Standard 9:
Mutual Accountability Mechanisms

The contract outlines mutual accountability mechanisms and remedies when responsibilities are not met for all parties.

Indicators:

9.1 Missing Assessment Remedy

Outlines a remedy for any student who is participating but for whom an assessment score is not available for determining outcome payment(s) process outcomes

9.2 Low Attendance Remedy

Outlines a remedy for any student who does not meet the attendance requirements

9.3 Tutor Consistency

Outlines a remedy for any student for whom the tutor consistency requirement is not met

9.4 Roster Modification Process

Specifies a process for substituting / removing students from the roster after it is finalized, including timeline and payment requirements

9.5 Implementation Plan Remedy

Outlines a remedy if any party does not meet the expectations in the Implementation Success Plan

Continuous Improvement

Learn More

The contract establishes a systematic approach to data collection, analysis, and collaboration that supports informed, transparent decision-making between districts and providers.

Establishing a framework for data-driven collaboration between districts and providers ensures that implementation challenges are identified and addressed promptly. This systematic approach to continuous improvement helps maintain program quality, supports rapid problem-solving, and ultimately increases the likelihood of achieving desired student outcomes.

Domain 5: Continuous Improvement

The contract establishes a systematic approach to data collection, analysis, and collaboration that supports informed, transparent decision-making between districts and providers.

Standard 10:
Partnership

The contract describes a partnership between the district and provider.

Indicators:

10.1 Collaboration

Articulates how the district and provider will collaborate to successfully achieve student outcomes, e.g., proactive communication about important updates, challenges, and opportunities; informal sharing of knowledge and feedback; and other mechanisms that prevent friction and build trust

10.2 Proactive Problem-Solving

Specifies that all parties will proactively identify strategies to increase / maintain student engagement, attendance, and participation (e.g., session reminders, attendance incentives)

Standard 11:
Process Outcomes

The contract includes process outcomes (indicators of student success and program implementation that are used to inform ongoing learning and continuous improvement but are not tied to payment).

Indicators:

11.1 Process Outcomes

Includes 3-5 process outcomes

11.2 Service Requirement Metrics

Includes process outcomes that measure and provide data for each minimum service requirement, e.g., student attendance; tutor consistency

11.3 Improvement and Progress Measures

Includes process outcomes that can be used to inform continuous improvement and monitor progress towards achieving payment outcomes, e.g., lesson / session pass rates; student performance on district or state assessments not tied to payment; feedback from teachers, school, and district leaders; responsiveness to feedback

Standard 12:
Continuous Improvement Structures

The contract includes clear expectations and structures to drive meaningful continuous improvement and progress monitoring.

Indicators:

12.1 Provider Meeting Schedule

Specifies schedule of continuous improvement meetings between the district lead and the provider, with meetings occurring no less than bi-weekly

12.2 District Meeting Schedule

Outlines cadence of continuous improvement meetings, including both provider-led and district-led sessions, for various combinations of district staff, school leaders, and teachers as needed to support implementation and progress monitoring (e.g., district data meetings that include cross-departmental district staff; district-provider-school meetings that include school leaders and teachers)

12.3 Data Use

Articulates a plan for data analysis and determination of next steps, including timelines for data availability and expectations for how process outcomes will be used to inform continuous improvement and monitor progress towards achieving payment outcomes

12.4 Participants

Identifies participants – including individuals from both the district and provider who hold appropriate roles and levels of authority within their organizations – to act on findings promptly and effectively as part of the continuous improvement process

Understanding the Center for OBC
Standards of Excellence

Each of the five domains represents an essential component for a successful Outcomes Based Contract (OBC), collectively forming the foundation for effective implementation. These domains are Mutual Accountability, Contingent Outcomes Payments, Clearly Defined Outcomes and Metrics, Clearly Defined Population, and Continuous Improvement. Each domain is anchored by two to three standards that outline the critical elements needed for robust outcomes based contracting within that domain. These standards serve as overarching statements, summarizing the key components of an effective OBC. Additionally, each standard is accompanied by specific indicators—tangible, observable elements that provide evidence the standard has been met. This structure clarifies expectations and provides a concrete framework for evaluating the success and fidelity of OBC implementation, ensuring each domain supports sustained, impactful outcomes.

While the standards and domains are consistent across all outcomes based contracts, the indicators are specific to each product line. The indicators in this document are specific to outcomes based contracts for high-dosage tutoring.

The National Student Support Accelerator’s High-Impact Tutoring Standards provide research-grounded guidelines for high-impact tutoring programs across six elements: Tutor, Data Use, Instruction, Learning Integration, Safety, and Cohesion. The Standards of Excellence for OBC – particularly the Mutual Accountability and Continuous Improvement domains – are informed by the NSSA High-Impact Tutoring Standards, incorporating evidence-based practices such as tutor consistency requirements, specific student attendance thresholds, and structured data collection for ongoing program improvement.

Note: For readability, these standards use the term “district” to refer to any organization serving students that enters into a contract with a provider. This may include CMOs, regional service centers, county offices of education, state education agencies, etc.

Standards of Excellence Resources

High-Dosage Tutoring Contract (Annotated)

A full contract example with annotation aligned to the The Center for Outcomes Based Contracting’s Standards of Excellence. The purpose of this exemplar is to provide guidance and references as partnerships pursue their own OBC contracts.

View Resource

High-Dosage Tutoring Contract Template

A customizable template for LEAs and SEAs to use in crafting a contract in service of an outcomes based contract (OBC) for high-dosage tutoring.

View Resource

Download Editable Template

High-Dosage Tutoring Exemplar Contract

A full contract example aligned to the The Center for Outcomes Based Contracting’s Standards of Excellence. The purpose of this exemplar is to provide guidance and references as partnerships pursue their own OBC contracts.

View Resource

High-Dosage Tutoring RFP Template

A customizable template for LEAs and SEAs to use in crafting a Request for Proposal (RFP) or other bid documents in service of an outcomes based contract (OBC) for high-dosage tutoring.

View Resource

Download Editable Template

Standards of Excellence for Outcomes Based Contracting: High-Dosage Tutoring

The Center for Outcomes Based Contracting Standards of Excellence™ for Outcomes Based Contracting: High-Dosage Tutoring establish clear benchmarks across K-12 education. These Standards ensure quality, consistency, and efficiency, streamlining the development of successful OBCs.

View Resource

High-Dosage Tutoring Exemplar Contract

View Resource

View All Resources

Glossary: Outcomes Based Contracting Terms and Definitions

Base Payment: Maximum contract amount available for minimum product/service delivery

Contingent Outcomes Payment: Payments that are earned only as students achieve the agreed upon outcomes

District: Any organization serving students that enters into a contract with a provider – CMOs, LEAs, regional service centers, county offices of education, state education agencies, etc.

Implementation Success Plan: Comprehensive plan designed and driven by the provider with input from the district, including but not limited to a description and timeline of professional learning, support of a success manager, a continuous improvement process, ongoing coaching, on-demand resources, and tech support. This plan articulates the responsibilities for all parties to improve implementation and drive towards agreed-upon student outcomes.

Metric: Includes assessment and measure/metric and threshold

Mutual Accountability: Agreed-upon commitments made between a district and provider, ensuring each party is responsible for the achievement of student outcomes

Mutual Accountability Mechanisms: Clear, predefined remedies for unmet partnership obligations that maintain trust and drive desired outcomes by making roles and responsibilities explicit

Outcome: Growth, gains, achievement, etc.

Outcome Payment Cap: Maximum amount paid for each payment outcome in aggregate

Payment Outcomes: Indicators of student success that are tied to payment

Price per Outcome: Amount paid per student for each payment outcome achievedProcess Outcomes: Indicators of student success and program implementation that are used to inform ongoing learning and continuous improvement but are not tied to payment