Standards of Excellence for
Outcome Based Contracting™:
Edtech Instructional Interventions
Five Domains of Outcomes Based Contracting
DOMAIN
DESCRIPTION
RATIONALE
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), and the research-based instructional intervention to be implemented.
Selecting a research-backed intervention appropriate for the population, 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), and the research-based instructional intervention to be implemented.
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 research-based edtech instructional intervention that is consistent with the Five EdTech Quality Indicators and 2025 SETDA EdTech Quality Indicators Guide, i.e., safe, evidence-based, inclusive, usable, and interoperable
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
Standard 3:
Dosage
The contract includes prescribed or recommended quantity, frequency / duration, and quality of an intervention derived from efficacy studies.
Indicators:
3.1 Prescribed Quantity
Articulates specific amount of intervention that research suggests is necessary to achieve results (if available, based on the grade level / band of the target student population and content area of the intervention) (e.g., total quantity – minutes, lessons, etc. – per week)
3.2 Structured Frequency and Duration
Describes how often students should receive the intervention and/or how long each session should last (if available, based on the grade level/band of the target student population and content area of the intervention) (e.g., number of sessions per week and/or ideal session duration)
3.3 Engagement Quality
Defines observable and measurable indicators related to the quality of student interaction and/or adherence to research-based design principles, providing evidence that the intervention is being implemented as intended and with sufficient cognitive investment to produce results (e.g., pass rate, completion rate, time actively engaged)
3.4 Dosage Measurement
Defines how the dosage requirement will be measured for each student (e.g., average minutes, total minutes, total lessons), and over what time period the dosage will be measured (e.g., weekly, monthly, quarterly)
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.
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 4:
Measurable Outcomes and Metrics
The contract includes measurable, research-backed outcomes
and metrics.
Indicators:
4.1 Achievement Metric
Includes one or more achievement outcome – and corresponding metric (assessment, measure, and threshold) – that is valid, reliable, and rigorous
4.2 Growth Metric
Includes one or more growth / gains outcome – and corresponding metric (assessment, measure, and threshold) – that is valid, reliable, and rigorous
4.3 Meaningful Outcomes
All contract outcomes and metrics are meaningful, i.e., aligned to district priorities
4.4 Malleable Outcomes
All contract outcomes and metrics are malleable, i.e., able to be impacted by the intervention
4.5 Measurable Outcomes
All contract outcomes and metrics are measurable, i.e., feasible to be accurately monitored to assess progress and attainment
4.6 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
Standard 5:
Data Collection and Sharing
The contract includes expectations, processes, and timelines for data collection and sharing.
Indicators:
5.1 Data Collection Timeline
Articulates timelines for assessment administration, data reporting/sharing, and payment for each outcome-metric pair, including process outcomes
5.2 Data Collection Timeline
Indicates individuals responsible for assessment administration, data reporting/sharing, and payment for each outcome-metric pair, including process outcomes
Contingent Outcomes Payments
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 6:
Payment Structure
The contract includes a per-student base payment.
Indicators:
6.1 Student-Based Pricing
Specifies per-student base price, i.e., not class-, school-/site-, or district-based pricing
6.2 All-Inclusive Pricing Structure
Specifies inclusive pricing, i.e., no additional line items for professional learning, project management, curriculum development, etc.
6.3 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
6.4 Outcome Cap Scaling
Specifies that the base payment and outcome caps are scaled based on the total number of rostered students
6.5 Base Payment Timeline
Defines the timeline and structure for when base payments will be made throughout the contract period
Standard 7:
Contingent Payments
The contract articulates a structure for payments contingent on outcomes.
Indicators:
7.1 Payment Contingency Requirement
At least 40% of the total contract value is contingent on student outcomes
7.2 Individual Outcomes Based Payment
Specifies that contingent payments will be made based on the attainment of individual student outcomes
7.3 Payment Definitions
Defines key terms, including base payment, payment outcomes, process outcomes, contingent payments, price per outcome, and outcome payment cap
7.4 Maximum Payment Specification
Specifies maximum potential payment
Standard 8:
Rate Card
The contract includes a completed rate card.
Indicators:
8.1 Payment Outcomes
Rate card includes 2-5 payment outcomes, including middle-of-year and end-of-year payment outcomes (for year-long interventions)
8.2 Rate Card Structure
Rate card includes clearly-defined outcome and metric pairs with per-student price and outcome cap for each
8.3 Budget Alignment Payment Definitions
Sum of the individual outcome caps is equal to the total budget
8.4 Base Payment Capum Payment Specification
Base payment outcome cap is equal to the per-student base payment multiplied by the number of students served
8.5 Outcome Cap Limits
Outcome caps are no greater than the per-student outcome price multiplied by the number of students served
8.6 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
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 9:
Minimum Service Requirements
The contract includes minimum service requirements for all parties.
Indicators:
9.1 Dosage Requirement
Articulates minimum dosage requirement for participating students and the district’s responsibility to ensure it is met
9.2 Dosage Monitoring Reports
Articulates provider’s responsibility to share clear reports / data needed to monitor dosage using the agreed-upon measurement at the student, teacher / classroom, school, and district levels – i.e., dosage quantity, frequency / duration, and engagement – and to ensure they are provided at the appropriate granularity and frequency for each audience
9.3 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: implementation timeline and key support milestones; professional learning plans for a variety of audiences; continuous improvement process, including frequency of data / report review; office hours and on-demand resources to support implementation and troubleshoot issues; and an assigned Client Success Manager and supporting Provider team) and all parties’ responsibilities for completing these activities
9.4 Platform Access Requirements
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
9.5 Data Sharing Protocol
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
9.6 Technical Requirements
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
9.7 Support Timeline
Specifies a timeframe for when the provider will deliver technical support when issues arise with the platform.
9.8 Roster Finalization Timeline
Specifies a timeline during initial stages of implementation for finalizing the participating student roster and computing associated base payment
Standard 10:
Mutual Accountability Mechanisms
The contract outlines mutual accountability mechanisms and remedies when responsibilities are not met for all parties.
Indicators:
10.1 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)
10.2 Low Dosage Remedy
Outlines remedies for any student who does not meet the dosage requirements as defined through the dosage measurement
10.3 Dosage Threshold
Defines the threshold at which a low dosage remedy may be triggered (e.g., if the student meets less than 70% of the required dosage based on the agreed-upon measurement)
10.4 Report Availability
Outlines remedies for when the agreed-upon reports are not available as necessary to monitor implementation
10.5 Roster Modification Process
Specifies a process for substituting / removing students from the roster after it is finalized, including timeline and payment requirements
10.6 Implementation Plan Remedy
Outlines a remedy if any party does not meet the expectations in the Implementation Success Plan
Continuous Improvement
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 11:
Partnership
The contract describes a partnership between the district and provider.
Indicators:
11.1 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
11.2 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 12:
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:
12.1 Process Outcomes
Includes 3-5 process outcomes
12.2 Service Requirement Metrics
Includes process outcomes that measure and provide data for each minimum service requirement, e.g., student attendance; tutor consistency
12.3 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 13:
Continuous Improvement Structures
The contract includes clear expectations and structures to drive meaningful continuous improvement and progress monitoring.
Indicators:
13.1 Provider Meeting Schedule
Specifies schedule of continuous improvement meetings between the district lead and the provider, with meetings occurring no less than bi-weekly
13.2 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)
13.3 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
13.4 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
Edtech Resources
Edtech RFP Template
This template is a tool for districts to use in crafting a Request for Proposal (RFP) or other bid documents in service of an outcomes based contract (OBC) for education technology products/platforms and services.
EdTech Contract Template
A customizable template to help districts and providers craft outcome based contracts for EdTech Contracts.
EdTech Feasibility Study
This feasibility study presents an analysis of the feasibility of K-12 school districts contracting with education technology (edtech) providers through an outcomes based contracting (OBC) model.