Journalists—at least the ones I know—tend to forget stories shortly after they are published. But occasionally there’s one so compelling that you have to go back.

I first heard about Brick Township, N.J., a decade ago while writing a story on autism for Education Week. In the late 1990s, very little was known about treating the disorder, much less the causes. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was studying Brick because of a perceived “autism cluster,” given its seemingly high rate of children diagnosed.

The quiet oceanside village was bombarded by press, and parents and residents were frantic to know why so many of their children were afflicted. Most believed environmental contaminants played a role, although medical mishaps and genetics were also frequently mentioned. School officials, though, pointed to an entirely different supposition—since Brick was one of the first places to provide educational services specifically for children with autism, desperate parents were moving to send their children to Brick schools.

When I decided to write about autism for ASBJ—this time looking at the costs, treatments, and how little is still known about the causes—the first place I researched was Brick. Surely by now there would be an answer to this medical mystery, the CDC must have found some fascinating evidence to explain the autism cluster, right?

Instead, I found that Brick’s rate of identification is now the norm in New Jersey, probably because medical experts’ heightened awareness of the disorder means many more children have been identified. And the CDC report raised more questions than it answered, essentially laying out in painstaking detail the lack of good national data and information.

But what Brick and several other districts have figured out is that, regardless of causes, they must educate and embrace these children. My story in this months’ ASBJ shows how they’re doing it.

Joetta Sack-Min, Associate Editor