I have long believed that when districts contract with outside vendors, they should be paying based partially on student outcomes.
I mean, what’s not to love about paying for results instead of promises?
That said, I wasn’t sure how to actually implement these ideas or answer all the yeah-but questions I’d get from superintendents. My recent conversation with Brittany Miller and Jasmine Walker of the
@SouthernEdFound helped fill in some of the big blanks.
SEF is leading the charge in advancing
#outcomesbasedcontracting by partnering with
#schooldistricts to adopt these innovative payment structures for services like
#tutoring.
I learned a lot from our conversation. Here are three of my takeaways:
Mutual Accountability is Key
Vendors are accountable because a portion of their pay (SEF recommends at least 40%) is dependent on
#studentoutcomes produced. But districts are also accountable for setting the right conditions for their vendors to succeed (e.g. ensuring attendance is above a threshold). If they don’t, they have to pay up.
Different Types of Service Providers Require Different Types of Contracts
Districts can’t simply copy and paste their tutoring outcome-based contracts for their
#edtech vendors, for example. There are different conditions to consider and results to measure. SEF did a feasibility study to help districts develop their edtech contracts that is linked below.
The Conditions are Ripe for Outcome-Based Contracting
Districts spent millions in federal COVID funds on
#learningrecovery interventions, and many are wondering what they have to show for it. That pressure blended with new edtech opportunities created by
#AI make now a golden opportunity for districts to give outcome-based contracting a chance.
Check out the full conversation and share your thoughts or questions in the comments. Or, share with an educator who can start to implement this on the ground!