The widespread adoption of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSI 2010) shows a commitment to changing mathematics teaching and learning in pursuit of increasing student achievement. CCSSM should not be viewed as just another list of content standards for publishers and assessment groups to design their products around. Many standards-based reforms to which CCSSI refer are described in NCTM's "Principles and Standards for School Mathematics" (2000). As a vision document rather than a curriculum document, "Principles and Standards" has been criticized in a variety of forums (e.g., blogs, discussion boards) for not going far enough to provide substantial guidance for the specific curriculum objectives that should be taught. CCSSM takes this extra step but remains aligned with NCTM's Principles. Despite some agreement, the groups differ somewhat in what is deemed essential for all students, particularly with respect to building functions. Specifically, they disagree about how essential the study of inverse functions is for all students and for curriculum coherence. In this article, the author suggests that as educators begin implementing CCSSM, they must remain fixed on the purpose of this initiative--to provide a focused, coherent curriculum. The challenge of accomplishing both focus and coherence is not completely met by the suggested pathways provided. They should consider topics such as inverse functions and composition that might increase the coherence of the curriculum and, therefore, be essential for all students. As teachers, curriculum coordinators, departments of education, and textbook publishers discuss which standards to include and in what order, they must consider which ideas will help students develop deeper understanding and engage in appropriate mathematical practices while maintaining coherence and focus. (Contains 1 figure.)