The practice of evidence-based treatment of challenging behavior in autism has been heavily influenced by the application of principles and practices based on the experimental analysis of behavior, particularly applied behavior analysis (ABA), to deficits or excesses in the behavioral repertoire of individuals with autism spectrum and related neurodevelopmental disorders. Indeed, for over 70 years, the learning principles established by Skinner and others have guided both the assessment and intervention process, evolving systematically as new findings are published and replicated. From early work addressing self-injury and aggression in those with severe developmental disabilities (Lovaas and Simmons, J Appl Behav Anal 2:143–157, 1969) to the most contemporary efforts to modify behavior through the use of antecedent manipulations (Luiselli and Cameron, Antecedent control: innovative approaches to behavioral support. Paul Brookes, 1998; Martinez et al., Educ Train Autism Dev Disabil 51(3):265–280, 2016), procedures based on functional equivalence (Carr, Functional equivalence as a mechanism of response generalization. In Generalization and maintenance: life-style changes in applied settings. Paul Brookes, 1988), and others based on positive behavior supports (Bambara and Kern, Individualized supports for students with problem behaviors: designing positive behavior plans. The Guildford Press, 2005), ABA has distinguished itself by a rigorous approach to quantifying the variables responsible for treatment success, by a reliance on functional analysis (Iwata et al., J Appl Behav Anal 27:197–209, 1994a), including the direct observation of both the molecular and molar nature of behavior (Powers, Behavioral assessment of autism. In Diagnosis and assessment of autism. Plenum, 1988), and by the demand for generalization, maintenance, and replicability of treatment effects (Baer et al., J Appl Behav Anal 1:91–97, 1968). In order to meet these standards, the field has relied upon the use of single-subject experimental designs (SSED) primarily, but has demonstrated the magnitude of effect by the replicability of findings by different researchers and clinicians. As such, the process of determining which practices are “evidence-based” is better understood as the description of which specific intervention strategies have demonstrated efficacy for which behavioral challenges are maintained by which variables, in what child or adult, under what conditions. Within this rubric, it becomes quickly evident that precise treatment is impossible without precise assessment. The strategy that resolves these predictive, formative, and summative evaluation concerns is termed Functional Behavioral Assessment, while the intervention process is described in various ways, including behavioral treatment, ABA, positive behavior support, etc.