A SAMPLE OF DISPUTE PROCESSING PROJECTS, SPANNING THE RANGE OF RESOLUTION TECHNIQUES FROM ARBITRATION, MEDIATION, REFERRAL TO SMALL CLAIMS COURTS, AND REFERRAL TO COURTS OF GENERAL JURISDICTION, WAS CHOSEN FOR ANALYSIS. INCLUDED WERE THE BOSTON URBAN COURT PROJECT, THE COLUMBUS NIGHT PROSECUTOR PROGRAM, THE MIAMI CITIZEN DISPUTE SETTLEMENT PROGRAM, THE NEW YORK INSTITUTE FOR MEDIATION AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION DISPUTE CENTER, THE ROCHESTER AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION COMMUNITY DISPUTE SERVICES PROJECT, AND THE SAN FRANCISCO COMMUNITY BOARD PROGRAM. ALL, EXCEPT THE SAN FRANCISCO PROGRAM WHICH IS STILL IN THE DEVELOPMENTAL PHASE, WERE VISITED DURING MAY 1977. PROJECT STAFF SIZE VARIES FROM 4 TO 10, AND NUMBER OF CASES HANDLED FROM ABOUT 350 IN BOSTON TO 4149 IN MIAMI. RESOLUTION IS ACHIEVED IN MORE THAN 90 PERCENT OF CASES. THE PROBLEMS OF CASE CRITERIA, TYPE OF PERSONNEL NEEDED, VARIOUS SOURCES OF FUNDING, AND INDIVIDUAL COMMUNITY NEEDS ARE DISCUSSED. GENERALLY SUCH PROGRAMS ARE CONSIDERED SUCCESSFUL BECAUSE THEY AVOID THE EXPENSE OF ARREST AND FORMAL COURT PROCESSING FOR MINOR CASES AND, IN ADDITION, OFFER LONGER-LASTING RESOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM. EACH CENTER MUST BE SET UP LOCALLY WITH FULL ATTENTION PAID TO LOCAL NEEDS, NEIGHBORHOOD PERCEPTIONS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, AND LOCAL RESOURCES. DETAILS OF THE OPERATION OF SUCH CENTERS AND CASE REPORTS OF THE SIX CENTERS STUDIED ARE INCLUDED. APPENDIXES GIVE A BIBLIOGRAPHY, THE CITIZEN DISPUTE SETTLEMENT PROJECT SURVEY, AND THE PROPOSED NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE DESIGN FOR NEIGHBORHOOD JUSTICE CENTERS.