As student accountability models have become the norm in the United States, first in individual states such as North Carolina and then throughout the nation with No Child Left Behind (NCLB), the implementation of inclusion as a curriculum delivery model for students with disabilities has been explored. The purpose of this study was to examine how the establishments of state (ABCs) and federal (NCLB) accountability systems have influenced the ways and/or the degree/extent inclusion has been implemented in Johnston County, NC High Schools. This study examines four periods of time: (a) prior to PL 94-142, (b) after PL 94-142 until the North Carolina ABCs, (c) the ABCs, and (d) the present which includes the ABCs and NLCB. Institutional Theory and Street Level Bureaucracy Theory were used to examine and explain the data collected about the implementation process. Administrative documents and data were collected and examined. Interviews with key personnel in the district were conducted and include superintendents, the chief academic officer, directors from the exceptional children's department, as well as principals, assistant principals, regular education and exceptional children's teachers. It was found that prior to the ABCs of North Carolina inclusion was not used as a method to instruct students with disabilities. After the ABCs were enacted, inclusion was introduced in Johnston County. The initial usage of inclusion was sparse, involving few students and teachers. Self-contained and resource classes were the preferred methods to educate students with disabilities. As No Child Left Behind became a law, more inclusion classes were used. While the use of inclusion increased with No Child Left Behind, it was found that an audit by the U. S. Department of Education that reemphasized the highly qualified teacher provision of the law has been the driving force that has caused schools to use inclusion as the preferred method for the educating of students with disabilities. A comparison of data with the aforementioned theories shows implementation of inclusion more completely follows the tenets of institutional theory. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]