Often there is a desire to evaluate a program, but there is no comparable comparison group available. This paper focuses on an evaluation model that can be used when there is no comparison group and when there is no pretest. The method--Model A--used by the Chapter 1 compensatory education program is described. Model A, which uses a pretest-posttest approach, is currently applied in most of the local educational agencies in the country. The one group posttest only design is advocated, which requires content specialists to identify which objectives on the posttest were included in the compensatory curriculum versus those included only in the regular curriculum. The compensatory students should perform better on compensatory objectives to which they were exposed in both the regular and compensatory programs than on regular curriculum objectives to which they were exposed only in the regular curriculum. Data from 2 successive years of an evaluation of a Chapter 1 program in Dallas (Texas) were analyzed. Data on 20 items were obtained from over 2,000 students each year at each grade level. The results were mixed, with third-graders performing significantly better on the district's criterion-referenced test items included in the compensatory curriculum, and second-graders performing better on items not included in the curriculum. When data for the two grades were combined, the results were in the expected direction. Results for the second year suggest that either the grade 2 compensatory curriculum or the implementation of that curriculum should be reviewed. Four analytical methods are outlined. Two data tables and eight figures are included. (TJH)