Data were collected from a relatively large (n=157) and nationally representative sample of small cities and towns. All were municipalities with populations between 5,000 and 49,999 that were not within the boundaries of major metropolitan areas. The sample was a stratified multistage cluster sample. For each municipality, attempts were made to conduct telephone interviews with four types of respondents: a local law enforcement official, an official of local government, an official from the local school system, and a recognized community leader who was active in local anti-drug efforts. Each of the four respondents was asked to name all of the anti-drug programs in the community. They were then asked which program was most well-known, which consumed the most resources, and which program was most effective in dealing with the major drug problem in the town. On the basis of consensus among respondents, one program in each town was selected for the survey. Of the 157 small cities and towns in the sample, 150 reported at least one anti-drug effort. For each municipality where at least one anti-drug program was identified, a telephone interview was conducted with a program representative. This interview focused on program orientations, funding sources, and criteria for success. The program representatives generally viewed their efforts as successful according to "soft" criteria, such as perceptions of community or student response, organizational survival or membership size, perceived decreases in juvenile arrest or juvenile drug use, and a variety of other informal sources of feedback. There were few methodologically sound evaluations of the programs in the sample. 3 tables and a 13-item bibliography