A preceding article (See NCJ-159178) examined the origins of crime laboratory proficiency testing and the performance of laboratories in the identification and classification of common types of physical evidence. Parts I and II together review the results of 175 separate tests issued to crime laboratories over the period 1978 to 1991. Laboratories performed best in determining the origin of fingerprints and palm prints, metals, firearms (bullets and cartridge cases), and footwear. Laboratories had moderate success in determining the source of bloodstains, questioned documents, toolmarks, and hair. A final category is of greater concern and includes those evidence categories where 10 percent or more of results disagree with manufacturers regarding the source of samples. This latter group includes paint, glass, fibers, and body fluid mixtures. This article concludes with a comparison of current findings with earlier results of studies sponsored by the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, along with a discussion of judicial and policy implications. 14 tables and 4 references