The Comprehensive Achievement Monitoring (CAM) model for project evaluation is compared with the usual classroom testing and pretest-posttest approaches. All three techniques are described and then examined in detail with respect to their advantages and limitations. The resources of project CAM in the areas of urban education and computer software are outlined. Three alternative methods for implementation of CAM by a state education agency and the practical considerations in implementation are examined. A bibliography on CAM is appended. (AE)