To clarify the relationship between an educational innovation and its setting, a pilot study was conducted in three schools which housed the Follow Through Program. Personal interviews were conducted with approximately fifteen Follow Through and non-Follow Through administrators, teachers, and associates who had some contact with the program. Follow Through had some impact on its setting and vice versa; moreover, there were effects not fully attributable to either which apparently were created by a reciprocal relationship between the school system and Follow Through. The program modeled an alternative set of procedures, decisions, relationships, and values which were enacted by a staff whose beliefs, values and training were different from the regular staff. The setting had at least as much impact on Follow Through as Follow Through had on the setting because the school system defined work conditions, and because as a parent body it incorporated a smaller enterprise (Follow Through) and eventually diluted it. Results indicated that a national study can and should be conducted to define the relationship between extent and kind of site vs. innovation differences, and the impact of site and innovation on each other with emphasis on these areas: hiring qualifications, job definition, models of learning, and of decision making. The most pervasive impact of Follow Through was its catalytic function--its sheer existence encouraged revision and change, neither of which are easily generated internally. The Bank Street Check List for implementation of a model program is appended. (CP)