This dissertation explores the post-hoc programmatic outcomes and experiences of participants in a large scale, grant-funded professional development (PD) program. This PD was an immersive, two-year induction program designed to improve state testing scores in science, and support early career science educators as they transitioned into the classroom. Using a theoretical framework of sense-making, similarities and differences are examined as they relate to individual site implementation. The analysis of data collected in the dissertation process suggest that the program may not have had the intended effect on participating teachers' practice, attrition rates, or participation in communities of practice for a number of reasons, including slow start-up time, condensed final cohort, and mismatches between mentors and the content of the teachers. Specifically, it suggests that the outcomes of the program for some participants may have been completely opposite the intended outcomes from the PD designers. Suggestions are given for policy makers, grant writers, professional development providers, and evaluators on how to more completely administer and analyze the outcomes of similar and future multi-site, multi-cohort grant programs. [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.]