COMPARATIVE ANALYSES WHICH SHOW NOT ONLY THE CURRENT WORDING OF LAWS BUT ACTUAL ENFORCEMENT PRACTICES AND APPLICABLE COURT MODIFICATIONS ARE A NECESSARY BEGINNING TO ANY SERIOUS EFFORT TOWARD IMPROVING A CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. TO ORGANIZE SUCH A PROJECT, A SPONSORING AGENCY, WHICH OFTEN IS A BAR ASSOCIATION OR A COURT-RELATED GROUP, SHOULD BE CHOSEN. RESEARCH, ADVISORY, AND CLERICAL HELP NEEDED IS DETAILED. THE ANALYSIS CAN BE IN COLUMNAR, NARRATIVE, OR LOOSELEAF BINDER FORM. THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF EACH ARE GIVEN. THE MAJOR SOURCE OF FUNDING WILL PROBABLY BE THE STATE CRIMINAL JUSTICE PLANNING AGENCY,BUT OTHER OTHER SOURCES ARE OFTEN BAR ASSOCIATIONS, COURT ADMINISTRATORS' OFFICES, LEGISLATURES UNIVERSITIES, AND PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS. ACTUAL IMPLEMENTATION OF A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS PROJECT IS DESCRIBED IN DETAIL. APPENDIXES CONTAIN A SAMPLE OF OHIO'S COLUMNAR ANALYSIS FORM, NEVADA'S NARRATIVE ANALYSIS, PENNSYLVANIA'S LOOSELEAF NARRATIVE PROJECT, AND THE GRANT APPLICATION TO THE PENNSYLVANIA CRIMINAL JUSTICE PLANNING AGENCY. THE STATUS OF STATE COMPARATIVE ANALYSES AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO VARIOUS NATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS ARE GIVEN WITH THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PROJECT DIRECTOR OR MAJOR CONTACT.