TWO PROJECTS CARRIED OUT IN THE 9-COUNTY EASTERN SHORE AREA OF MARYLAND SERVED ESSENTIALLY THE SAME TARGET POPULATION, THE UNDEREMPLOYED AND THE UNDERPRIVILEGED, IN AN EFFORT TO IMPROVE THEIR OCCUPATIONAL POSITIONS. THE FIRST, SEPTEMBER 1963 TO SEPTEMBER 1964, WAS DEVOTED TO VOCATIONAL TRAINING AND GUIDANCE, AND THE SECOND, JUNE 1964 TO SEPTEMBER 1965, TO DEVELOPING ON-THE-JOB TRAINING OPENINGS AND EASING JOB ENTRY REQUIREMENTS, AND DEVELOPING AND UTILIZING A PREVOCATIONAL HOME STUDY PROGRAM, A NETWORK OF VOLUNTEER TUTORS, COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARDS, AND COUNSELING AND FOLLOWUP TECHNIQUES. FOLLOWUP DATA WERE COLLECTED FROM INTERVIEWS WITH PROJECT STAFF, COMMUNITY LEADERS, AND PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS 6 TO 12 MONTHS AFTER COMPLETING TRAINING. JUDGED BY THE NUMBERS WHO WENT THROUGH THE SYSTEM, THE FIRST PROJECT WAS NOT VERY SUCCESSFUL AS A TESTING-COUNSELING-TUTORING SYSTEM FOR THE CHANNELING OF UNEMPLOYED INTO VOCATIONAL TRAINING TO IMPROVE THEIR JOB OPPORTUNITIES. ALTHOUGH MORE WAS ATTEMPTED IN THE SECOND PROJECT AND MORE INDIVIDUALS ACTUALLY WENT INTO TRAINING, THE LONG-TERM RESULTS WERE DISAPPOINTING IN RELATION TO PROJECT GOALS. FOR EXAMPLE, INSTEAD OF TRAINEES BECOMING REGULAR EMPLOYEES AT THEIR TRAINING SITE, AS HAD BEEN PLANNED, ONLY 30 PERCENT WERE STILL WORKING FOR THEIR TRAINING EMPLOYER IN JUNE 1966. HOWEVER, 77 PERCENT OF THE FIRST AND 80 PERCENT OF THE SECOND GROUP WERE EMPLOYED COMPARED WITH 42 AND 47 PERCENT AT THE TIME OF RECRUITMENT, AND A GREATER NUMBER HAD HIGHER INCOME LEVELS. AN URBAN-BASED COLLEGE LACKING RESOURCES, BACKING, AND EXPERIENCE IN OCCUPATIONAL TRAINING IS NOT LIKELY TO BE A MAJOR INSTRUMENT IN THE SOLUTION TO THE EMPLOYMENT PROBLEMS OF THE DISADVANTAGED, RURAL POOR. (ET)