SBP physically moves probation officers from traditional central or district offices into middle, junior, and high school buildings where youth on probation spend most of their day. SBP proponents believe it not only offers more effective monitoring of juvenile probationers but also better communication between schools and probation agencies. Of all the States, Pennsylvania has made the most extensive commitment to SBP. Not only are SBP programs widespread in the State, they are located in all types of schools and encompass all types of cases. An initial evaluation of SBP in Pennsylvania, which was completed in 1997, documented several benefits, including closer and more informed supervision and monitoring of probationers, better school attendance by probationers, and better overall communication and working relationships between juvenile probation officers/agencies and schools. In addition, cases assigned to SBP did not penetrate the juvenile justice system as deeply as traditional probation cases. In a more recent statewide process evaluation of SBP in Pennsylvania, school-based probation officers, probation administrators, and school administrators all reported high levels of satisfaction with the SBP. The most significant challenge posed by SBP involves the allocation of staff resources, since evaluation research has suggested that a minimum standard of 70 percent is required for the amount of time an officer should spend in the school in order to be considered "school-based." Assigning probation officers to more than one school building impedes their ability to meet this time standard. This paper lists the essential components of effective SBP programs, outlines core components of good juvenile probation practice, and describes steps juvenile courts and probation departments can take to implement SBP. 2 tables, 6 notes, and 7 references