The study was based on interviews, questionnaires, and case- file analysis in five probation areas and several prisons, as well as a national survey of probation services. Those interviewed included prisoners before and after release, prison officers, field and seconded probation officers, probation managers, and magistrates. A majority of all prisoners interviewed considered ACR to be a better and fairer system than parole. Contact with prison-based probation officers was not generally viewed as helpful, and although attitudes toward "outside" probation officers were more positive, under 60 percent of prisoners had received a visit from their prospective supervisor. Prison officers were evenly split between approval and disapproval of ACR, but two-thirds supported the introduction of sentence planning. Prison managers were mainly supportive of the ideas behind ACR, but generally felt that the sentence planning element was not yet working because of a lack of resources, inadequate training, and increases in the prison population. A review of the overall effectiveness of ACR suggests that it is too early to form firm conclusions, but that attitudinal measures showed some positive change in offenders' attitudes toward offending and victims. Also, an analysis of known reoffending rates among a small sample of completed licensees showed that these were well below expected rates. This report suggests considering greater use of discretion, guided by risk assessment, in both supervision and sentence planning, so that work is reduced with some offenders to gain space for intensive work with others. 22 tables and 49 references