Solution no. 1: Input, Throughput, and Output: My first recommendation is directed at HR 3610; Pub L. 104-208; 110 statistical. 3009-546, which went into effect to ensure that the border was protected from the arrival of illegal immigrants in America and made the requirements for illegal immigrants even more stringent than before (Stevens) . Inputs for this recommendation are utility costs for computers and Internet access, costs for travel, additional training, and office supplies. The results are assessments and screening tests. Output includes reducing the amount of illegal aliens deported and providing benefits by increasing the application process at the federal level. Best type of cost-benefit analysis: (explain why selection is better/why others are not as useful) For this recommendation, input would be measured in dollars and output is measured in utility or level of achievement. It would be more effective to use cost-utility analysis to calculate the effectiveness of providing incentives to certain illegal aliens. Input would be measured in dollars and output in points awarded to compare legal and illegal immigrants using the incentives and those still in the United States thanks to the amnesty. Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) would not be used because of the dollar cost, which is required for both input and output and there is no dollar amount for output. The fixed-utility cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) method would not be used because this recommendation would actually produce an increase rather than a decrease, while serving the same population. The fixed budget method (CEA) would not be effective because the population served remains the same....... middle of the paper... cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) would not be used because this recommendation would actually have a increase rather than decrease, while serving the same population. The fixed budget method (CEA) would not be effective as the population served remains the same. Best outcome measure: (explain why selection is better/why others are not as useful) Quasi-experimental is the best outcome evaluation design for this recommendation because the data can be compared before and after the change in the increase in the duration of work visas. Since these groups are not randomly assigned, but are instead classified into a before and after, it would be more effective to use the quasi-experimental method rather than the experimental one. Due to the fact that pre-experimental experiments are used, in the case of using one group it will not be effective.