THE RHODE ISLAND DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ADMINISTERED ITS ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT TITLE I PROGRAMS THROUGH A SPECIALLY ESTABLISHED OFFICE WHICH SERVED THE LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES. THE TITLE I COORDINATOR INFORMED LOCAL UNITS OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND PROVIDED CONSULTANTS TO HELP IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF PROPOSALS. EVALUATION GUIDELINES WERE DEVELOPED BY THE STATE, BASED ON FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS. MOST PROJECTS (22) USED A PRE- AND POSTTEST DESIGN TO COMPARE EXPECTED GAINS WITH OBSERVED GAINS AND LOSSES. THE MAJOR ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS WERE THE DELUGE OF PROPOSALS TO BE REVIEWED IN A SHORT TIME AND THE CONFUSION OF THE LOCAL LEVEL ABOUT THE ACT'S PROVISIONS. LACK OF SUFFICIENT PERSONNEL ON BOTH STATE AND LOCAL LEVELS WAS ANOTHER PROBLEM. LOCAL DISTRICTS ALSO HAD DIFFICULTIES IN USING EVALUATION METHODOLOGY. ON THE WHOLE, COOPERATION BETWEEN COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAMS AND LOCAL AGENCIES WAS GOOD, BUT CLEARER DELINEATION OF THE RESPONSIBILITIES AND OBLIGATIONS OF EACH UNIT IS FELT TO BE IMPORTANT. IN GENERAL LOCAL AGENCIES FELT THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE GREATER DISCRETION ABOUT THE ALLOCATION OF THEIR FUNDS, A POSTION WHICH REFLECTS A WISH FOR A GENERAL RATHER THAN A CATEGORICAL AID BILL. COOPERATIVE PROJECTS BETWEEN PUBLIC AND NONPUBLIC SCHOOLS WORKED SUCCESSFULLY. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ACADEMIC REMEDIATION PROGRAMS WAS THE MAJOR FUNDED ACTIVITY. THE DOCUMENT CONTAINS THE REQUIRED COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECTS' ACTIVITIES, STAFF RECRUITMENT METHODS, EVALUATION MEASURES, AND DATA ON PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS, ATTENDANCE, AND DROPOUT RATES. (NH)