Between August 2024 and March 2026, WestEd, in collaboration with The Center for Outcomes Based Contracting, carried out a mixed methods evaluation of eight early adopter school districts located in California, Florida, Mississippi and Texas that implemented tutoring or educational technology interventions under outcomes-based contracting (OBC) agreements.
The findings, detailed in Evaluation of outcomes based contracting: Final report, published in July, cover associated student outcomes, district spending, the impact of OBC on district-provider relationships and more.
Contracting with external vendors is a common occurrence in local educational agencies for various services. While traditionally, procurement is focused on inputs like what will be provided and by how many people and payment happens regardless of outcomes, OBC ties a portion of the provider’s compensation to the achievement of specific and measurable goals for a targeted student population.
“Overall, the findings suggest that OBC has strong potential to improve implementation integrity, strengthen district–provider partnerships, and contribute to positive student outcomes when implemented with clear target populations, sufficient dosage and duration, and strong organizational capacity,” the report states.
The evaluation concluded that clear, detailed contracts, enhanced communication and strong data use between districts and providers were significant factors to facilitating shared problem-solving and improved classroom execution. The OBC agreements fostered stronger accountability for districts and providers although districts had more responsibility for implementation.
Additionally, “successful OBC requires baseline district capacity, adherence to implementation integrity, school-level buy-in, and external support,” the report explains.
Though the sample of LEAs where an analysis was possible was limited, “district spending on interventions under an outcomes based contract was similar to spending on comparable interventions under traditional contracts, suggesting that districts may receive greater intensity of services for a comparable cost,” the report notes, adding that “a substantial share of spending was directly tied to students meeting outcomes.”
Contract development offered an opportunity for a foundational partnership to be built between the district and provider. “OBC required internal district collaboration and external guidance for those new to the process, and some providers appeared better positioned to participate in OBC than others, with particular challenges for nonprofit providers and smaller providers,” the report states.
In the LEAs where causal-impact analysis was possible and the intervention was active for the intended period, positive effects on student outcomes were observed. OBC also helped to advance organizational capacity that could extend benefits beyond the intervention.
“Taken together, the findings indicate that OBC represents a promising approach for strengthening school districts’ procurement, implementation integrity, and accountability for student outcomes. The model appears especially promising when paired with strong organizational capacity, implementation support, and sustained attention to continuous improvement,” according to the report. “At the same time, the study underscores the importance of continued research, careful implementation planning, and sustained investment in district and school capacity as OBC expands to additional districts, intervention types, and state-level initiatives.”
Learn more in the report.
