The research this was built from.
Washington reviewed the systems its own districts run, and published what it found. What follows is evidence that the problem is real and widespread across the state. Whether this software solves it is a separate question, and answering it needs a pilot that has not yet run.
The state already counted this
Two numbers explain why the seam matters. Each of these is the system most Washington districts run, so the gap between them is not one district’s bad luck — it is where the thread is most often lost.
Both figures: OSPI, Statewide IEP Feasibility Study, 24 April 2025, quoted verbatim — ospi.k12.wa.us
“drastically underserving the needs of their primary users”
Educators in the same study reported “dozens of manual workarounds, duplicate data entry, and time-intensive report building”.
Not our words. Washington’s.
The state reviewed the systems its districts use today and found educators largely unsatisfied. Washington is now procuring one statewide IEP system — pilot 2027-28, launch 2029-30 — and it will cover the IEP only. MTSS, Section 504, multilingual services and health stay exactly where they are.
What this evidence supports
OSPI surveyed districts and reported what they said about the systems they use. That establishes the problem: widespread, documented by the state, and independent of who built this software. It supports nothing about outcomes here, because no pilot has completed and there are no results to report.
When there are, they will appear as their own section, under their own heading, with their own limits stated. Survey evidence and outcome evidence answer different questions, and putting them under one heading would let the state’s authority carry a claim the state never made.