THE ORIGINAL PURPOSE OF BREMER HOUSE AND THE PROBATIONED OFFENDERS REHABILITATION AND TRAINING (PORT) PROGRAMS WAS TO REDUCE SOCIAL CONTROL BY PROVIDING ALTERNATIVES TO INSTITUTIONALIZATION. ANALYSIS OF SENTENCING PATTERNS, CHARACTERISTICS OF OFFENDERS IN EACH PROGRAM, AND RECIDIVISM RATES SHOWED THAT, INSTEAD OF DECREASING SOCIAL CONTROL, THE PROGRAMS WERE ACTUALLY INCREASING SOCIAL CONTROL BECAUSE CORRECTIONAL DECISIONMAKERS WERE USING THEM AS ALTERNATIVES TO PROBATION. THE STAFF AT BREMER HOUSE HAS ACTIVELY BEGUN TO FIGHT THIS TREND AND HAS REFUSED TO ACCEPT MANY OFFENDERS BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT CANDIDATES FOR STATE INSTITUTIONS. USE OF THESE PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF PAROLE HAS RESULTED IN INCREASED COSTS TO THE STATE, INSTEAD OF THE REDUCED COSTS PROJECTED AS A RESULT OF DECREASED INSTITUTIONALIZATION. STUDIES OF RECIDIVISM SHOWED THAT ABOUT 50 PERCENT OF THOSE DIVERTED TO BREMER HOUSE EVENTUALLY WERE INCARCERATED AND SERVED EXTENSIVE INSTITUTIONAL TIME IN ADDITION TO RESIDENTIAL TIME IN THE PROJECT. THE FINAL CORRECTIONAL COSTS WERE ONLY SLIGHTLY LESS THAN IF THE DIVERTED OFFENDERS HAD BEEN INCARCERATED IN THE FIRST PLACE. THE PORT PROJECT HAS FEWER SCREENING OPTIONS. IT MUST ACCEPT PROBATION CLIENTS. HOWEVER, AMONG THE PORT CLIENTS ONLY ONE HAD PAROLE REVOKED. SIMILARLY, ONLY ONE IN A COMPARISON GROUP OF 20 HAD PAROLE REVOKED. GENERALLY, THE PORT CANDIDATES WERE LESS LIKELY TO SUCCEED ON PAROLE, SO THIS WAS CONSIDERED A POSITIVE INDICATION. EIGHT PORT CLIENTS AND 10 BREMER HOUSE RESIDENTS WERE PROBABLY DIVERTED FROM STATE INSTITUTIONS FROM 1972 THROUGH 1974. THERE WERE NO NEW CONVICTIONS AMONG THE PORT CLIENTS. TWO OF THE 10 BREMER HOUSE RESIDENTS RECEIVED FELONY CONVICTIONS AND WERE INCARCERATED FOR CRIMES COMMITTED AFTER ABSCONDING FROM THE PROGRAM. ALTHOUGH THESE STUDIES INCLUDE ONLY 2 PERCENT OF MINNESOTA OFFENDERS, THEY DO BRING UP IMPORTANT POLICY CONSIDERATIONS. IF RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS ARE TO PERFORM THEIR INTENDED FUNCTION, CONSIDERABLE EDUCATION AMONG JUDGES AND PROBATION OFFICERS IS REQUIRED. FOR CLIENTS WHO ARE NOT DIVERTED FROM STATE INSTITUTIONS, ADDITIONAL INCREASES IN SOCIAL CONTROL RESULTING FROM USE OF THESE PROGRAMS FOR PROBATION IS RELATIVELY HIGH. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT REVOCATIONS FOR TECHNICAL VIOLATIONS BE REDUCED AND THAT DIFFERENT TYPES OF SUPERVISION OTHER THAN AUTOMATIC STATE INCARCERATION BE INSTITUTED FOR REVOKED OFFENDERS, ESPECIALLY IF THE VIOLATIONS ARE MINOR.