Jillian Evans
“Too risky.” “Payment depends on perfection.” “Is the upside worth the coordination?” These are the concerns providers bring to the Center for Outcomes Based Contracting when they first encounter the model—and they’re understandable. Jillian Evans unpacks four misconceptions that get in the way, and shows how strong outcomes based contracts are built to be fair, transparent, and designed so providers can earn more for delivering real results.
Outcomes based contracting promises that districts pay for results, not just services. But that promise only holds if districts and providers can see what's happening while there's still time to act. Brittany Miller, Executive Director of the Center for Outcomes Based Contracting, and Justin Serrano, CEO of Littera Education, examine what it takes to build data infrastructure that makes contract terms visible in real time—and what becomes possible when accountability is legible at the speed of implementation, not the speed of publication.
Tutoring works best when implementation works. This blog shares three key takeaways from the recent Accelerate convening, connecting research on dosage, instructional alignment, and participation to the Standards of Excellence for Outcomes Based Contracting™: High-Dosage Tutoring. The takeaway is practical: districts can turn evidence into clear expectations, stronger partnerships, and more reliable student results.
Every dollar a district spends on tutoring should be tied to better student outcomes—but most contracts track minutes logged, attendance, or time on platform instead. Hedreich Nichols explores the real cost of vague contracts and introduces the Center for Outcomes Based Contracting's free District Toolkit: four field-tested resources that help districts negotiate, structure, and monitor tutoring partnerships built around what students actually learn.