We found moderate correlations among four policy attributes (consistency, specificity, authority, and power), which suggest that in many states, at least in design, standards-based reform is working as advocates imagined--aligned content standards and assessments established, backed up by detailed guidelines and frameworks, incentivized by rewards and sanctions, and supported with extra resources and programs for struggling students and their teachers. Our findings suggest that specificity and authority may be related to improvements in procedural knowledge, and no change in problem solving or conceptual understanding, while power (accountability) may be associated with a small decrease in all types of learning. We found that disadvantaged students showed gains in procedural knowledge and did not lose ground in either conceptual understanding or problem solving. Implications for developing an improved theory of policy effects on achievement are discussed.