This paper reports a case study of the implementation within the special education division of the Massachusetts state department of education of fiscal reforms required by the Massachusetts Comprehensive Special Education Statute, Chapter 766. Three theoretical perspectives were used to organize the study--a rational, organizational, and cognitive view of the implementation process. By examining the same series of events from three theoretical perspectives, an attempt was made to understand how different theories contribute to the understanding of a single series of events. The study concludes that different theoretical perspectives cover substantially disjoint bodies of evidence and are based on different conceptual vocabularies and notions of what "good" implementation should be. Also, each perspective yields different action recommendations for practitioners. The specifics of these differences are explored in depth for the case and three perspectives are presented in the research. Given the large degree on noncommeasurability between competing theoretical perspectives, practitioners should have only modest expectations for the utility of theories of implementation, using their own best intuitions to select those theoretical lenses that best help to attain their own well-defined objectives. (Author/IRT)