Even though family and neighbors continue to seek and provide appropriate care for children during after school hours, the need for after school childcare programs has escalated in recent years (Nash & Fraser, 1998). Effective programs must match the developmental needs of their participants, and they must also fit the demands and resources of the particular settings in which they are implemented (Graham et al., 1997). The purpose of this study was to examine the self-reported and formally proposed needs of the communities served by 172 after school programs and the proposed as well as accomplished objectives associated with those needs. Each program responded to surveys on the characteristics of the target population, identified risk factors, social impacts, community needs, and personnel background and experience. Additionally, on-site interviews with program administrators yielded cross-validated information. Low academic performance, high poverty, high crime rate in the community, high illiteracy, limited adult learning opportunities, high absenteeism of school students, low parental involvement in educational programs, student behavioral problems in school, limited leisure activities, and poor health care services were recognized as the top 10 population characteristics in the communities represented by these after school programs. These issues were also viewed as community risk factors. Nonetheless, these characteristics were addressed by a significantly (p < .05) less number of programs in their proposals based on z-tests examining the differences between proportions. There were even significantly (p < .05) less numbers of programs that accomplished activities that were intended to address these issues. In terms of background and expertise, programs most commonly communicated experience in out-of-school program operation, homework assistance and tutoring, operation of enrichment activities, coordination with community organizations, and providing health/fitness and sport programs. However, z-tests examining the differences between proportions revealed that there were a significantly (p < .05) less number of programs that adequately utilized their experiences and accomplished their intended activities than those that did not. While it might not be realistic for an after school program to address all the issues related to the population characteristics, risk factors, social impact, and community needs, more programs should work harder to address these issues and incorporate them into their curriculum and activities. Program objectives and priorities should also be consistent with the recruitment, training and assignment of staff to optimize the strengths of human resources. Through these efforts, better attainment of program objectives may be achieved.Keyword(s): alternative programming, measurement/evaluation, youth-at-risk