A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE AFDC PROGRAM IS PROVIDED, AND THE USE AND TYPES OF COMPUTER-AIDED TECHNIQUES USED BY AFDC (MATCHING, SELECTIVE CASE ACTION, AND SELECTIVE CASE SCREENING TECHNIQUES) ARE NOTED. PRIMARY DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN THESE TECHNIQUES ARE IDENTIFIED IN TERMS OF THE DATA BASES USED TO PERFORM THE MATCH, THE PRIMARY FOCUS OF THE MATCH, THE FREQUENCY WITH WHICH THE MATCH IS TYPICALLY CONDUCTED, AND THE OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES ASSOCIATED WITH PROCESSING THE MATCH. THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COMPUTER-AIDED TECHNIQUES IS QUESTIONABLE SINCE HARD EVIDENCE ON THEIR EFFECTIVENESS IS LACKING AND NO FORMAL ASSESSMENT OF THE ANTIFRAUD POWER OF VARIOUS COMPUTER-AIDED TECHNIQUES HAS BEEN PERFORMED. AVAILABLE COST ANALYSES OF THESE TECHNIQUES HAVE SIMILAR DEFICIENCIES. ALSO, THESE TECHNIQUES ARE LIMITED BY THE QUALITY OF THE DATA, THE ADEQUACY OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND MANAGERIAL SUPPORT, THE RELIABILITY OF INFORMATION CONCERNING THE COSTS AND EFFECTIVENESS OF VARIOUS TECHNIQUES, AND RESTRICTIONS EMANATING FROM THE CONSIDERATION OF PRIVACY. THE REPORT RECOMMENDS THAT PRIOR TO INITIATING ANY ACTIVITIES IN COMPUTER-AIDED TECHNIQUES TO CURTAIL FRAUD, LEAA MUST DETERMINE WHETHER PUBLIC ASSISTANCE FRAUD IS A SERIOUS ENOUGH CONCERN TO WARRANT THEIR INVOLVEMENT GIVEN OTHER CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM NEEDS. A TABLE COMPARING THE USE OF COMPUTER-AIDED, ANTIFRAUD TECHNIQUES IS INCLUDED. (MFE)