Suggestions, based on the experience of researchers at Oak Ridge (Tennessee) Associated Universities (ORAU), are offered on how evaluations in which true experimental designs are not possible can be designed for meaningful comparison. The ORAU conducts evaluation and assessment studies of educational programs intended to explore some aspect of the production of scientists and engineers (S/Es) in the United States. To assess these programs in the absence of traditional control groups, researchers have turned to several national databases. Questions and response items from large national studies sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and other agencies make possible the comparison of program participants with national norms. Among NSF surveys used are: (1) Survey of Earned Doctorates; (2) Survey of Doctorate Recipients; (3) Survey of Recent Science, Social Science, and Engineering Graduates (New Entrants Survey); and (4) National Survey of Natural and Social Scientists and Engineers (Survey of Experienced S/Es). Only clearly relevant items are selected. These techniques are not a panacea but can be helpful when it makes sense to compare program participants with external or general populations. A seven-item list of references is included. Figures 1 through 5 give examples of items adopted for comparison. Figures 6 through 10 illustrate general and definitive comparison groups. (SLD)