On November 29th, 2025, we will celebrate the 50th anniversary of President Ford’s signing of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, now known as IDEA. The law guarantees the entitlement of a "free appropriate public education" to the nation's children and youth with disabilities; states can no longer enforce laws to exclude them. Documentation of the progress of the implementation of the Act is available to the public through annual reports to Congress published by the Department of Education as well as a plethora of research reports on a range of topics related to IDEA and children who receive these services. While these reports give rich data on children with disabilities, they provide no data about music environments. Systematic research reviews provide another way to view large bodies of information across time, identify gaps in the research publications and provide guidance for future actions. Some reviews examine research with children with disabilities, music education, and music therapy in public schools, the most recent systematic review covering publications through 2009. The purpose of this study is to update information from the most current reviews of music related research with children with disabilities from the years 2010 through 2025 to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1975. To begin, we searched data bases for articles using the following terms: “music therapy,” and “music” with “children with disabilities” in peer-reviewed journals published for the years 2010 through 2025. We identified research with participants who were identified by the authors as having one of the types of disabilities eligible for services, 3-21 under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). We also hand searched articles in issues of Music Therapy Perspectives, Journal of Music Therapy, Journal of Research in Music Education, and Update: Applications of Research in Music Education. From this preliminary list of articles, all three of us collaborated to reach consensus for a final list for analysis. We identified 27 articles that met our criteria. Of those articles, a majority (n=17; 63%) were published in music therapy journals, with less in music education journals (n=6; 22%) and in non-music journals (n=4; 15%). The most prevalent participants in the students were those with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (n=14; 52%), followed by various disabilities (n=11; 41%) and specific learning disabilities (SLD) (n=2; 7%). The most frequent setting of the studies was in schools (n=11; 41%), clinics (n=8; 30%), followed by universities (n=2; 7%), multiple settings (n=2; 7%), and home (n=1; 4%); three of the studies did not specify the setting where the data was collected. The most prevalent research methodology utilized in the studies was experimental (n=19; 70%), followed by descriptive (n=2; 7%), action research (n=2; 7%), mixed method (n=2; 7%), and case study (n=2; 7%). We also categorized the behaviors measured and observed as part of the study, with many studies measuring multiple behaviors across categories; the most prevalent categories were social (n=12; 44%) and communication (n=11; 41%). Only four (15%) of the studies included measures of generalization. Additionally, only four (15%) of the studies collected data in environments where students with and without disabilities were present. When comparing these results to the most recent systematic review (Brown & Jellison, 2012), there was a decrease in articles appearing in music education journals, while the percent published in music therapy journals remained consistent. Additionally, the current review indicates an increase in articles with children with ASD as the participants (52% in the current review; 23% in the previous review). The percentage of studies that used experimental research methodologies was consistent; however, the current review has more variety of research methodologies. The most prominent behavior category remains social (48% in previous review, 44% in current review). The current study identified more articles that included measures of generalization (15%) compared to the previous review (9%); however, there were fewer articles where the data were collected in inclusive environments (15% in current review; 22% in previous review). This information can continue to inform future research questions, particularly in light of how children are served in special education environments that fall under IDEA. This study also provides updated information about disability categories that are prevalent in the current body of research; however, a recent study of music therapists in U.S. public schools identifies a different proportion of disability labels being served (Brown & Draper, in review). The gap in disability categories in the research compared to practice also provides valuable information for researchers.