Of the 20 offenders involved in the 14 mediations, only 7 were considered to have provided a high level of participation, and these offenders had a high level of participation in only a portion of the mediation. Six others showed a medium level of participants, and the remaining seven offenders had a low level of participation. Such minimal participation in a process that is designed for and encourages offender participation is viewed by the author as due to a lack of awareness and understanding of the principles of restorative justice, which emphasize the constructive involvement of both victims and offenders in achieving an outcome that addresses the harms the crime caused the victim and promotes constructive accountability for the offender. Victims were also unprepared for and unaware of the restorative principles underlying victim-offender mediation. Both victims and offenders tended to view the mediator as an authority figure who would ultimately decide how the case was to be handled. Restorative justice, on the other hand, is about ownership of the resolution of the harm done to the victim and what the offender can do to remedy that harm and ensure that his/her (offender's) needs and behavior underlying the crime are addressed. The study involved the observation and analysis of mediations processed at a Balanced and Restorative Justice Center. All mediations were observed by one researcher, who compiled detailed notes on observations. All premeditation sessions were also observed. A total of 14 mediations were viewed, which produced 17 agreements. Postmediation survey data were obtained from 119 victims and 130 offenders. 1 table, 13 references, and 4 appendixes that outline the mediation agenda, define levels of participation, and summarize mediation participant characteristics