VPI grantees have been active in achieving significant shifts in the State policy arena in reducing access to handguns and increasing public resources for after-school violence prevention programs. They have also provided data an personal testimony to inform local decisionmaking on issues such as the funding of prevention programs or licensing of liquor outlets. A diverse group of young health professionals have taken the first steps toward careers in violence prevention. Other individuals have been recognized as recipients of the California peace prize, which spotlights the efforts of individuals throughout the State who have dedicated their lives to reducing violence in their communities. These activities were conducted under the VPI functional categories of community mobilization and delivery of violence prevention programs to youth, leadership development, the education of policymakers and opinion leaders, and the conduct of policy-relevant research on violence prevention issues. The effects of VPI were assessed through a variety of analytical methods that included case studies, in-depth interviews, and quantitative techniques. Since no finite, measurable objectives were specified, this report acknowledges that the judgments are necessarily subjective. The report indicates that the most significant outcome of the VPI's first 5 years is virtually impossible to measure in traditional evaluation terms. Over the past several years, the diverse array of participants in the VPI have begun to refer to themselves as part of a "movement," in that they have established connections through the VPI that will continue to impact communities long after funding has been terminated. The report acknowledges that the project should have invested more in qualitative analysis of community action programs, so as to learn more about the ways in which such programs have influenced youth to act as peacemakers among their peers. It was a mistake to focus on the measurement of communitywide outcomes after only a relatively short period of time. 3 tables, 6 figures, and appended description of the evaluation and legislative analysis methods