As mandated by federal law, all students with a disability who qualify for special education and related services must be provided a free appropriate public education (FAPE). With ongoing changes to statutory definitions and legal interpretation of what constitutes a FAPE under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004), it can be a challenge for school and district-level administrative personnel to keep up to date with legal developments in special education (Bon, 2015; Decker & Brady, 2015; Lynch, 2017; Militello, Schimmel, & Eberwein, 2009; Umpstead, Decker, Brady, Schimmel, & Militello, 2015). School and district administrators have a responsibility to understand the implications of such interpretations for the work of school teams and families in order to impact the outcomes for students with disabilities. After analysis of the FAPE implications of the recent Supreme Court decision, a two-pronged approach is described to guide administrators in their support for school practitioners and families through legal literacy and effective use of high-leverage, evidence-based special education practices. A recent change in the legal landscape occurred when the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in "Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District" (2017) that educators must now provide students in special education an educational program that is "appropriately ambitious in light of [their] circumstances…[with] goals [that] may differ, but every child should have the chance to meet challenging objectives" ("Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, 2017," p. 1000). This article analyzes the reactions of federal and lower courts in the year following the "Endrew F." ruling and provides school administrative personnel with timely and practical guidance and recommendations.