After years of fully embracing ed tech in schools — especially with 1:1 device programs during the COVID-19 pandemic — districts now must decide if it’s worth it to continue implementing a large array of technology, especially amid growing budget constraints and pushback against screentime in classrooms.
One innovative approach to help districts evaluate the return on investment from their ed tech tool purchases is the use of outcomes-based contracting, in which district payments made to ed tech companies are in part contingent on meeting student achievement goals. In a report released Monday by the nonprofit Digital Promise and the Center for Outcomes Based Contracting, researchers analyzed how this new contracting strategy impacted a group of districts that experimented with it in recent years.
The study found that outcomes-based contracting empowered districts to take the lead on ed tech contract terms, boosted implementation rates of ed tech, and pushed districts and ed tech providers to consider the most effective ways to use ed tech to improve student learning outcomes.
California’s Fresno Unified School District is one such district experimenting with outcomes-based contracts. During the 2024-25 school year, Fresno USD entered into an agreement with Curriculum Associates for the district’s use of the company’s i-Ready tool, said Ann Loorz, the district’s executive director of procurement.
A multi-department district committee, which includes experts in data research and curriculum, meets weekly with the ed tech vendor to discuss what’s working and what isn’t with the tool’s use in Fresno USD’s classrooms. Loorz said that the district has been able to adjust according to the research regularly provided by Curriculum Associates.
“Instead of just waiting until the very end, when it’s like ‘Oh, that’s all we got and we owe you how much money?’ It’s like a partnership from the very beginning,” Loorz said.
Because of the conditions of the Curriculum Associates contract, Fresno USD did not pay for 100% of the negotiated services since some of the district’s expected student outcomes were not entirely met, Loorz said.
The study by Digital Promise and the Center for Outcomes Based Contracting said that this innovative model “reimagines procurement.” Instead of the traditional contracting approach of a one-way seller-client relationship, outcomes-based contracts develop a “two-way partnership based on mutual accountability,” the report said.
Traditional versus outcomes-based contracts
Traditional ed tech procurement often lacks clarity on the tool’s purpose, the study said, adding that it can ultimately result in low rates of commitment and implementation at the school level. Outcomes-based contracting, meanwhile, gives teachers and students the ability to have a greater understanding of an ed tech tool’s purpose and the best ways to use them, the report added.
The analyzed districts that implemented the newer contract approach “demonstrated substantial evidence that the OBC model can address many of the core pain points that have resulted in billions of dollars invested with little to no return for learner outcomes,” the study said.
Some districts have even carried their learnings from their first outcomes-based contract to other kinds of contracts “to ensure resources are being strategically allocated so learners are positively impacted by interventions.”
The approach also takes a lot of legwork to roll out, and it would currently be very difficult to make every district contract follow the outcomes-based model, Loorz said. For instance, she said that outcomes-based contracts often require regular check-ins and accurate data collection from the provider. When these types of contracts are possible, however, it’s worth implementing, she added.
For districts looking to implement outcomes-based contracts, the study recommends that districts clearly communicate about the approach throughout their school systems, including at the teacher level, in order to gain buy-in and drive accountability. If teachers don’t understand what ed tech tools under the contract are intended to specifically support, then implementation will vary across the district, the study said.
Loorz’s key advice for districts considering outcomes-based contracting with ed tech providers is to bring together members from different departments to make the contract development well-rounded. She also emphasized that it’s important to ensure that data is accurate and useful when monitoring student outcomes outlined in the contract.
Dive Awards
