At the time of the demise of bilingual education in California via Proposition 227, Chueng and Drabkin (1999) discussed the unchecked prevalence of poorly run bilingual programs and the apathetic administrators who provided inadequate oversight in terms of ensuring program quality. Proponents of dual language immersion programs hope to avoid this apathy and poor implementation. Program effectiveness depends on the quality of its implementation (Li, Steele, Slater, Bacon, & Miller, 2016). While immersion practitioners and researchers are acutely aware of the list of non-negotiables that are the cornerstone of a successful immersion pathway (Fortune, 2009, de Jong, 2016), they often encounter difficulties in engendering respect of these principles among site administrators. These administrators are confused by some of the counterintuitive aspects of the immersion model. In Louisiana, Louisiana Act 196 (Session 2014) was the solution found for this issue. Louisiana Act 196 requires that the state design a template reflecting these non-negotiables, create a review rubric, attach a state certification to it, and make it mandatory for schools to obtain their certification by 2016-17. This literature review examines the rationale for each element of the immersion state site certification rubric.