The original purpose of the Title I program of the "Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965" was to provide supplementary services to assist low-achieving students in high-poverty schools, and schools were required to target Title I funds specifically to serve such students. In 1978, the schoolwide program (SWP) option was introduced to provide higher-poverty schools with flexibility to use Title I funds for whole-school approaches to improving achievement for low-achieving students. Unlike schools using the traditional targeted assistance program (TAP) approach, SWP schools are allowed to consolidate Title I funds with those from other federal, state, and local sources and are not required to ensure that the funds are spent only for specific students identified as low-achieving. Over time, the poverty rate threshold for eligibility to operate schoolwide programs has been lowered and the prevalence of SWP schools has grown, gradually rising from 10 percent of all Title I schools in 1994-95 to 77 percent in 2014-15. Implicit in the intent for SWPs is that the flexibility will allow them to implement systemic approaches to improve academic outcomes for all students in schools with high concentrations of poverty, particularly low-achieving students. At the same time, the continuation of the TAP approach also reflects a specific policy intent: to focus the smaller amount of total Title I funding in lower-poverty schools on supporting students with the greatest needs, rather than diluting the funds across a larger number of students. This study examines how these two types of programs compare in the services and resources they provide with Title I funds and their decision-making processes for allocating these resources. [For the full report, see ED591033.]