This article reports the results of a study that examined what happened to the utilization of Medicaid beneficiaries, eligible under Aid to Families with Dependent Children, who were mandatorily enrolled in several capitated alternatives in the Kansas City area. Their experience is contrasted with that of a comparison group selected from the St. Louis area. The types of plans analyzed include those sponsored by hospitals, neighborhood health centers, HMOs, and private physicians (IPAs). With the exception of emergency room use, all plans controlled utilization equally well. Results are explained in light of their management and policy implications.