A THIRD OBJECTIVE OF THIS PROJECT WAS TO DEVELOP A NEW PROCESS THROUGH WHICH CRIMINAL JUSTICE ISSUES COULD BE ADDRESSED. THE EVALUATION METHODS CONSISTED OF A REVIEW OF THE TERMS OF THE GRANT AWARD, AN EXAMINATION OF DOCUMENTATION CONCERNING THE PROGRAM'S HISTORY AND ADMINISTRATION, AND AN ANALYSIS OF APPROXIMATELY 30 PERSONAL INTERVIEWS WITH JUDGES, REPRESENTATIVES OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE AGENCIES, AND REPRESENTATIVES OF CITIZEN INTEREST GROUPS. THE EVALUATORS NOTED THAT SINCE THE GRANT PROPOSAL WAS COUCHED IN VAGUE TERMS, EVALUATION WAS DIFFICULT. THE OBJECTIVE OF DEVELOPING JUDICIAL STANDARDS AND GOALS WAS CONSIDERED TO BE ACHIEVED THROUGH THE FORMULATION OF A STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES FOR THE JUDICIARY WHICH SETS FORTH JUDICIAL RESPONSIBILITIES IN POLICY-MAKING, POST-CONVICTION ACTIVITIES, JUDICIAL EDUCATION, AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM COOPERATION. THE OBJECTIVE OF DEVELOPING A 'NEW PROCESS' WAS CONSIDERED TO BE ACHIEVED THROUGH THE FORMATION AND DELIBERATIONS OF A JOINT COMMITTEE OF THE MUNICIPAL AND SUPERIOR COURTS. IT IS NOTED THAT NO IMPLEMENTATION OF STANDARDS WAS ACHIEVED DURING THE FIRST PROGRAM YEAR. IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT THE PROGRAM ACHIEVED MANY OF ITS OBJECTIVES, BUT THAT IT WAS TOO EARLY TO JUDGE ITS IMPACT ON THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. CONTINUATION AND REFUNDING OF THE PROGRAM WAS RECOMMENDED.