This interim process evaluation report focuses on the impact of funding cuts on Boston's 1981-82 Title I program, possible areas for further cutbacks, and several policy issues. Results of questionnaires completed by administrators, teachers, and paraprofessionals as well as interviews and classroom observations were all used in the evaluation. Overall, individualized instruction was seen as the program's greatest strength. Staff development needs included more materials for English-as-a-second-language students and students with low motivation, and improved classroom management techniques. Despite cutbacks, morale was quite high, the reduction of clerical aides was felt as a minor burden, and the reduction of paraprofessionals did not affect the program a great deal. The area that was seen as most able to afford further cutbacks was materials and supplies. Personnel cutbacks viewed as suitable were in the number of community liaison aides, central administrators, and secondary paraprofessionals. Regarding possible grade cuts, the consensus was that Grades 4-7 were crucial. Reading labs were regarded as more cost effective than regular Title I classes but less professionally enjoyable. As for policy issues, more than half the principals felt that continued parental involvement was important. The majority of respondents in elementary schools wanted to retain the pull-out instructional model, while a substantial minority at the secondary level would prefer that Title I be offered as regularly scheduled instruction. Personnel in schools overwhelmingly preferred that different readers should be used in the Title I and the regular program. Fifty-four percent of Title I teachers reported that they were already certified in reading, and 14 percent were working toward certification. (CMG)