With the establishment of the Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service, communities have depended on Extension Agents to address relevant needs. Extension Agents have used different approaches such as the Texas Community Futures Forum to obtain information on issues affecting people. The problem was that Texas Community Futures Forums have never been evaluated from the perception of Extension Agents. The purpose of this concurrent multi-modal cross-sectional survey research was to evaluate the perceptions of Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Agents (Extension Agents) regarding the effectiveness of the Texas Community Futures Forum (TCFF) in their communities. A process evaluation framework and five research questions guided the study. Two of the research questions posed asked whether there was a significant difference among how well AgriLife Extension programs meet the four program areas of needs and the importance among the four program areas identified in the Community Forum. A third question asked the extent to which competing priorities keep Extension Agents from meeting the needs identified in the Community Forum. The last two open-ended questions requested responses from participants regarding changes the community experienced from conducting the Community Forum and the support necessary for Extension Agent to further conduct the Community Forum. A concurrent multi-modal survey research design approach was taken. Closed and opened questions were asked of 459 Extension Agents throughout Texas; 161 Agents responded. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze numeric data. A one-way ANOVA was employed to test null hypotheses of no differences. Narrative comments were coded using open and axial methods, and themes were identified. For research question 1, a one-way ANOVA indicated a statistically significant difference among how well AgriLife Extension programs met the four program areas of needs identified in the Community Forum with a moderate to large effect size. Tukey HSD post hoc test indicated significant pairwise differences between CED and ANR, CED and FCH, CED and 4-H/Youth, and ANR and FCH. For research question 2, a one-way ANOVA indicated a statistically significant difference in importance among the four program areas identified in the Community Forum with a moderate to large effect size. Games-Howell post hoc test disclosed significant pairwise differences between ANR and FCH, ANR and CED, FCH and 4-H/Youth, and 4-H/Youth and CED. For research question 3, other competing priorities were most noted for keeping Extension Agents from meeting the needs identified in the Community Forum. The theme that emerged was additional expectations beyond daily workload which included two categories administrative and other daily tasks and expectations, and 4-H responsibilities. The theme that emerged from research question 4 which was consistent throughout all program areas was new programming. Several themes emerged from the final research question on the type(s) of support necessary to further conduct the TCFF at the county, district, and state level: Involvement from community and stakeholders, additional resources, support and guidance, prioritize administrative directives to avoid impacting local programming needs, and provide resources to effectively administer the TCFF. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://bibliotheek.ehb.be:2222/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]