This report is intended to provide a snapshot of public school services provided to kindergarten through twelfth (k-12) grade students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) across the state of Michigan (MI). The authors used a systematic sampling process to collect information from over 200 school professionals statewide, resulting in a high degree of success in recruiting participants appropriately representing school districts from a variety of socioeconomic backgrounds and geographical regions. In order to understand parent perspectives on these services, the authors also collected information from 34 parents of k-12 students with ASD. Finally, supplemental information was collected through observing in several classrooms, and through a survey of a small sample of special education training program directors serving institutes of higher education across the state. Key findings are: (1) Statewide datasets that are currently available on students receiving special education services are not highly conducive to university research and evaluation efforts; (2) Nearly one-third (32%) of school professionals reported that they did not expect the student about whom they reported to reach grade-level achievement standards; (3) Twenty-six percent (26%) of the students with ASD on whom school professionals reported were described as never or rarely having access to the general curriculum; (4) Of the 65 educational interventions on which school professionals were asked to report their use, the five most commonly reported being used were: visual supports, structured teaching, direct instruction, applied behavior analysis, and social stories. Four out of these five interventions (all except direct instruction) have substantial research-based evidence supporting their use for students with ASD; (5) Though many school professionals reported using the four above-mentioned interventions that are supported according to research efforts, they most commonly reported using the given interventions for only part of the day, and many did not report using them at all (i.e., 31% to 44% of school professionals reported not using them for the student on whom they reported). Follow-up observations suggest that school professionals may not incorporate core aspects of these interventions in the programming provided to students; (6) The most common way in which special educators reported being trained on interventions that had substantial research support was through graduate study; (7) Paraprofessionals reported having little or no formal training in the interventions with the greatest research support, even though nearly one-third of the students were reported to have a 1:1 paraprofessional/teacher assistant work with them during the school day; and (8) The majority of parents (62%) reported some level of satisfaction with educational services provided; however, many (76%) also reported having to request additional school services beyond what the school originally offered to provide. Discussion and implications of key findings are provided, along with some suggested implications for future research and practice. Appended are: (1) Observation Tool; (2) Demographic Information of Target Students by County Region and Socioeconomic Level; (3) NSP and NPDC on ASD Definitions; (4) Respondent Level of Satisfaction for Each Service Provided to Child by Public School System; and (5) Demographic Information by Socioeconomic Category and Geographic Region. (Contains 1 footnote.) [Additional funding for this paper was provided by the Skillman Foundation.]