What does it mean to provide an appropriate program to toddlers with autism spectrum disorder (ASD)? As the number of children with ASD continues to increase, this opening question is one that parents, providers, researchers, advocates, and taxpayers struggle with on a daily basis. Boyd and colleagues (2010 [this issue]), in their thoughtful review, begin to describe what researchers suggest may meet the needs of young children with ASD and their families. These authors applaud their careful analysis and the propaedeutic description they provide of what are evidence-based practices and common elements across comprehensive treatment models for toddlers with ASD. Nevertheless, the authors are concerned that they did not discuss the gross discrepancies between the types of services that are recommended by researchers and what services most families receive in Part C programs. As a field, there is a need to carefully consider what provision of appropriate early intervention services might mean for Part C providers, families, and administrators if all infants and toddlers with ASD had access to a "comprehensive treatment model" through a publicly funded program. The purpose of this commentary is to consider what Boyd and colleagues' recommendations might mean for Part C and its consumers and participants. Specifically, the authors want to pose two fundamental questions for the field to ponder under the larger umbrella question "What is the role and responsibility of publicly financed programs in meeting the needs of toddlers with ASD and their families?" Their questions are about access and outcomes: (1) What are the issues surrounding equal access to the diagnosis of ASD?; and (2) What are the issues surrounding equal access to interventions using evidence-based strategies for children with ASD?