Information in the report is based on interviews conducted during site visits to 12 States and on statistical analysis of information provided by the State STOP administrators for all of the subgrants awarded with the first year of STOP funding (fiscal year 1995). Findings show that States find the STOP grants easy to use, and they appreciate the amount of technical assistance available from the involved Federal agencies. The Office of Justice Programs did act quickly to get the 1996 and 1997 STOP funding "on the streets," although the timing of the 1996 distribution was delayed by late passage of 1996 appropriations. The STOP planning and grantmaking process is beginning to change interactions among law enforcement, prosecution, and nonprofit nongovernmental victim service agencies. Lead agencies with a history of involvement in issues related to violence against women were most adept at strategic planning for STOP funding, but many other agencies learned quickly. The study also found that the process of soliciting STOP subgrant applications and selecting subgrants for award varied greatly from State to State. State laws that waive filing fees for protection/restraining orders, waive charges for evidentiary examinations in sexual assault cases, or establish full faith and credit for protection/restraining orders issued by other jurisdictions were mostly in place, but implementation often lags far behind. People interviewed on site visits identified many barriers to effective use of the civil and criminal legal systems, as well as gaps in services that STOP funds might be used to remedy. Direct victim services and training for police officers and prosecutors were the largest funding categories that used the 1995 STOP funds. Among the many recommendations presented in the report is one that suggests evaluation activities should receive more attention from State STOP coordinators and subgrantees; technical assistance should help. 5 tables and appended supplementary information