Students identified with Emotional/Behavioral Disorders (EBD) often exhibit behavioral challengtablees that negatively affect their academic performance. One of the weaker academic areas for these students lies in reading. Although numerous research on interventions to improve their reading outcomes has been conducted, some students continue to lag behind their typical peers. The use of instructional practices not supported by strong empirical evidence may deter students' reading outcomes from improving. To address the reading performance gap, educators are encouraged to use evidence-based practices supported by strong empirical research. In order to facilitate this evidence base, the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) provides research quality indicators to evaluate interventions' studies for validity and rigor. This study applied the CEC quality indicators to evaluate the methodological rigor of research on reading interventions for students with EBD published between 2000 and 2020. Findings suggest that most studies generally meet a lot of the rigor standards set forth by the CEC. Researchers using single case designs (SCDs), however, may need to include effect size measures in their results to illustrate the quantitative effects of the interventions on reading outcomes. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.