The Broken Windows theory is composed of two main claims, a “place” claim and “person” claim, which reinforce each other. What makes places “bad” is the way people act in them and what makes people inclined to act “badly” is the kind of places they inhabit. An explanation of the two claims is reflected. The “place” claim argues that disorder (abandoned buildings with broken buildings, graffiti, garbage strewn streets) makes public places uninviting to those who want to be and feel safe and opens the door for “deviants” who engage in criminal behavior. The “person” claim is when disruptive people get away with small misbehaviors and they tend to escalate their misbehavior to more damaging activity. The Broken Windows’ ingredients are to establish and maintain order in places so there is a sense of safety and not to let people get away with minor infractions so they know they will be unable to get away with major ones. Community corrections needs to go beyond the offender into the community. Broken Windows in criminal justice aggressively targets at-risk probationers and seeks to build, in the places probationers live, the collective effectiveness that is needed to make things safe. Instead of merely punishing, probation can fix broken windows and repair the effects of those windows.