A comparative case study to evaluate the administration of Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Title I programs was conducted in eight state departments of education and 32 school districts. Interviews were supplemented by review and analysis of documents and available data at each site. General findings included: (1) evaluation was primarily considered to mean achievement testing; (2) evaluation was unrelated to other administrative activities, such as program design or change; and (3) attention was focused on evolving sophisticated evaluation techniques rather than on using test results. Some promising evaluation techniques were used by a few school districts: establishing objectives against which to evaluate the Title I program; conducting a study of the instructional process within the Title I program; and attempting to institute a content, input, process, and product (CIPP) evaluation model. (Implications of this case study findings for other federally funded educational programs were discussed, as well as the Title I Evaluation and Reporting System). (MH)