The potential for schools of education as major resources for research and development and other knowledge-generation and knowledge-use activities is discussed, along with the negative view of federal policymakers in this regard. The study reported here was designed specifically to employ contemporary organizational theory and case study aggregation methods on the problems of "sheltered units" or bureaus within educational institutions. A set of propositions and counterpropositions were derived and tested about the nature of the organizational climate and its function. A list of structured questions and answers about the outcomes of interest that could be used with each of eight case studies was then generated to form an analytic checklist. Three readers reviewed and completed checklists for the case studies, making possible aggregate descriptions of university-based bureaus, their organizational contexts, and their potential. It is noted that most of these bureaus currently have two to four staff members, engage in multiple processes (such as research, development, evaluation, dissemination, adoption and field service, or research and field service), were created to respond to immediate perceived needs, reside in doctorate-granting institutions, and are undergoing mission redefinition or role extension, but are hindered by fiscal exigencies. It is concluded that the study provided a test of the range of applicability of theory relating to organizational contexts for "sheltered units," and of the usefulness of the Lucas methodology in coping with data formerly not amenable to aggregation. A bibliography is included. (Author/MSE)