THE SURVEY SOUGHT INFORMATION ON THE SCOPE AND HISTORY OF RESTITUTION IN JUVENILE COURTS, THE TYPES OF RESTITUTION ORDERS IMPOSED, WHETHER RESTITUTION INCREASES OR DECREASES CONTACT BETWEEN THE OFFENDER AND THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM, THE GOALS OF RESTITUTION PROGRAMS, AND ATTITUDES AND EXPECTATIONS WITH REGARD TO RESTITUTION. THE USE OF RESTITUTION WAS REPORTED BY 86 PERCENT OF THE RESPONDENTS. THE AVERAGE RESTITUTION PROGRAM HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE FOR ALMOST 17 YEARS. THERE IS CONSIDERABLE SUPPORT FOR RESTITUTION AMONG JUDGES AND OTHER JUVENILE COURT OFFICIALS, EVEN IN COURTS THAT DO NOT HAVE RESTITUTION PROGRAMS. THE MOST COMMON REASON FOR NOT USING RESTITUTION IS LACK OF LEGAL AUTHORITY. COURT PERSONNEL, PARTICULARLY THOSE WHOSE PROGRAMS USE SEVERAL TYPES OF RESTITUTION, FIND RESTITUTION AN EFFECTIVE MEANS OF REDUCING RECIDIVISM AND IMPROVING THE ATTITUDES OF VICTIMS TOWARD THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. THE PROBLEM OF ENFORCING RESTITUTION ORDERS APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN OVEREMPHASIZED IN EARLIER STUDIES: THE MAJORITY OF COURTS SURVEYED REPORTED GOOD COMPLIANCE WITH RESTITUTION ORDERS. ESTIMATED EXTENT OF COMPLIANCE DOES NOT DIFFER WITH SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF JURISDICTIONS OR WITH THE PROPORTION OF CASES IN WHICH RESTITUTION IS REQUIRED. THE GREATEST COMPLIANCE RISK APPEARS TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH REQUIRING A JUVENILE TO OBTAIN AND HOLD A JOB IN ORDER TO MAKE MONETARY RESTITUTION. SUPPORTING TABULAR DATA ARE INCLUDED.