Earlier reviews of impact evaluations by the World Bank, the OECD, and others have concluded that policy-makers must be cautious regarding what ALMPs can realistically achieve. The evidence suggested that these programs were not a panacea for unemployment but some types of interventions, properly designed, could be effective for some workers. It should be noted that these reviews were based almost exclusively on the experience of industrialized countries because very few evaluations existed anywhere else. In this paper, we build on the 72 scientific (i.e., control-group) evaluations considered in the previous World Bank study (Dar and Tzannatos, 1999) by adding 87 new studies. With this additional evidence, we can ask whether the original conclusions still hold. Moreover, with some evaluations now being carried out in transition and, to a lesser extent, developing countries, we can begin to ask whether the findings of impact evaluations in industrialized countries apply in these contexts as well.