DOES THE INMATE HAVE A RIGHT TO MAKE REASONABLE SUGGESTIONS ABOUT THE WAY HIS LIFE IS REGULATED DURING INCARCERATION? THIS QUESTION HAS BEEN AT ISSUE IN NUMEROUS CORRECTIONAL DISTURBANCES DURING THE PAST DECADE. STARTING JUST A FEW YEARS AGO, CONCERNED CORRECTIONAL PROFESSIONALS, TOGETHER WITH INMATES AND OUTSIDE ARBITRATORS, SOUGHT TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION BY ADAPTING THE TRADITION OF FORMAL CONFLICT RESOLUTION THROUGH NEGOTIATION AND ARBITRATION TO THE UNIQUE ENVIRONMENT OF THE PRISON. THE WARD GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE (WGP), DEVELOPED IN CALIFORNIA YOUTH AUTHORITY INSTITUTIONS, A MAJOR PROGRAM IN THIS AREA, HAS BEEN NAMED AN EXEMPLARY PROJECT BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE. THE WGP IS BASED ON THE PHILOSOPHY THAT INMATES MUST HAVE AN ACTIVE ROLE IN SETTLING GRIEVANCES, THAT WARDS AND LINE STAFF MUST WORK TOGETHER TO SOLVE DISPUTES, AND THAT BOTH SIDES MUST BE ABLE TO TURN TO AN INDEPENDENT PARTY FOR AN UNBIASED REVIEW. A THREE-TIERED REVIEW PROCEDURE WAS DEVELOPED TO ACCOMMODATE THAT PHILOSOPHY. THE GRIEVANT'S FIRST FORMAL RECOURSE IS A HEARING BEFORE A WARD-STAFF COMMITTEE COMPOSED OF HIS PEERS AND AN EQUAL NUMBER OF LINE STAFF. SHOULD THE SOLUTION OF THIS COMMITTEE BE UNSATISFACTORY TO EITHER PARTY TO THE GRIEVANCE, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAL TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OR, IN SOME CASES, THE DIRECTOR. THE THIRD AND FINAL LEVEL OF APPEAL IS TO A THREE-PERSON PANEL COMPOSED OF AN OUTSIDE PROFESSIONAL ARBITRATOR, ONE ADVOCATE FOR THE GRIEVANT, AND ONE SPOKESPERSON FOR THE ADMINISTRATION. THE YOUTH AUTHORITY'S GUIDELINES SPECIFY THAT THERE WILL BE NO REPRISALS WHATSOEVER FOR FILING A GRIEVANCE. ALL DECISIONS, REGARDLESS OF LEVEL, MUST BE PUT IN WRITING WITH REASONS FOR ANY DENIALS. EVALUATIONS OF THE WGP HAVE SHOWN THAT THIS PROGRAM OF CONTROLLED CONFRONTATION HAS WORKED -- IN FACT, PERFORMANCE OF THE WGP HAS EXCEEDED EXPECTATIONS. AFTER A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE WGP PROGRAM AND RESULTS, THE MANUAL REVIEWS EACH OF THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE YOUTH AUTHORITY TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF FORMAL GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES IN ALL OF CALIFORNIA'S YOUTH INSTITUTIONS. THE ORGANIZATION, STAFF POSITIONS, AND LEVELS OF REVIEW COMMON TO THE PROCEDURES OPERATING IN CYA INSTITUTIONS ARE ALSO DESCRIBED. TYPES OF GRIEVANCES HANDLED BY THE PROCEDURE, AND THE TRAINING AND MONITORING SYSTEMS OF THE WGP ARE EXAMINED AS WELL. THE FOLLOWING REPLICATION ISSUES ARE EXPLORED IN DETAIL: ESTABLISHING A CLEAR NEED FOR A FORMAL GRIEVANCE MECHANISM; ESTABLISHING CREDIBILITY FOR THE PROCEDURE BOTH INSIDE THE INSTITUTION AND WITHIN THE CORRECTIONAL BUREAUCRACY; DETERMINING HOW THE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE WILL BE INTEGRATED INTO NORMAL PROCEDURE AND HOW IT WILL RELATE TO EXISTING ACTIONS AND POLICIES; AND PREPARING FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROCEDURE. THE METHODS AND RESULTS OF TWO FORMAL EVALUATIONS OF THE WGP ARE DESCRIBED, INCLUDING THE COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BOTH THE PROGRAM AND THE PROGRAM EVALUATION. FINALLY, THE MANUAL DESCRIBES A BASIC FRAMEWORK FOR CONDUCTING A GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE EVALUATION AND DISCUSSES POSSIBLE EVALUATION MEASURES NOT CONSIDERED BY THE CYA EVALUATION. THE APPENDIXES INCLUDE SPECIFIC PROGRAM GUIDELINES AND FORMS FOR THE WARD GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE.