This study examines the results of the Alternative Identification and Reporting (AIR) program, which promoted the nonuse of disability labels for students receiving special education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (i.e., students who would previously have been identified as having an emotional/behavioral disorder, specific learning disability, mild mental impairment, other health impairment, and/or orthopedic impairment), in a group of 26 elementary and middle schools in West Virginia. The AIR program was founded on the premise that the determination of a specific disability category and subsequent labeling is not necessary for providing students needed instructional and behavioral services. Instead, staff were to focus on the instructional and behavioral needs of the students. Survey and assessment data were used to examine the results of the AIR program. In response to e-mail invitations, 273 teachers, 20 principals, 12 assistant principals, and 11 psychologists completed online questionnaires. Additionally, an analysis of WESTEST/WESTEST 2 assessment data examined whether students with disabilities attending AIR schools outperform students with similar disabilities in non-AIR schools in mathematics and reading/language arts. The AIR program had four main goals. Regarding its first goal of establishing and reinforcing the commonality of instructional and behavioral needs for students, survey data indicate the AIR program made limited progress. The AIR program made some progress in its second goal of transitioning teachers, administrators, and parents towards a model of support that is based on the student's instructional and behavioral needs and not a defined area of disability. Additionally, the survey results suggest that the AIR process made progress with students in diminishing the burden that a label appears to place on them emotionally and the associated low expectations. Also addressing the third goal, analyses in this study reveal some higher, though statistically insignificant, gains in test scores for AIR students in mathematics and reading compared with students with similar disabilities in non-AIR schools. Although the AIR program did not fully achieve its first three goals, it appears it is well on its way to doing so if the findings from this study can be utilized to inform program implementation going forward. Further, it is hoped that the project has achieved its fourth goal, which is to contribute to the national dialogue associated with research related to early intervention, response to intervention, and appropriate instruction and support for students who demonstrate the need for the protections of IDEA. [For the related literature review, "Effects of Disability Labels on Students with Exceptionalities: A Brief Review of the Research Literature," see ED606653.]