The nature of the Cooperative Extension Service in agriculture was examined to identify aspects that could be applied to the design of an educational extension service. To learn about the organization, programs, and priorities of Cooperative Extension, employees of the state extension services in California, Colorado, New Mexico, New York, and Wisconsin were interviewed. These states were selected on the basis of geographical distribution and variability on such criteria as population distribution (rural or urban), natural resources, and extension service organizational arrangement. In all but Wisconsin, 6 to 12 people were interviewed, including the state director, a state extension specialist, and county agent in both rural and urban counties. Also interviewed in some states were state-level staff development officials, regional specialists, faculty members at the state college, and paraprofessionals. In Wisconsin, the Chancellor/Vice Provost and the Assistant Chancellor/Director of Cooperative Extension were interviewed. Among the findings were that: in general, the extension service was decentralized and loosely coupled; there was a low degree of Federal control over state- and county-level units; production agriculture was still the central concern of Cooperative Extension; in most states, counties and groups of counties could initiate programs in any area which are especially responsive to local needs and provide an immediate, concrete service, i.e., Community Resource Development, Pesticide Certification, and Expanded Food and Nutrition Program. (NQ)