A NUMBER OF BARRIERS TO EFFECTIVE CASE RATING IN LARGE PROSECUTIVE AGENCIES RESULT IN THE INABILITY OF SUPERVISING ATTORNEYS TO ALLOCATE PROSECUTIVE TIME AND RESOURCES RATIONALLY. ALTHOUGH AUTOMATED CASE RATING MAY SEEM LIKE A DENIAL OF PROSECUTIVE DISCRETION, THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE. COMPUTERIZED CASE RATING FREES PROSECUTORS FROM THE NEED TO TREAT CASES BEARING THE SAME LEGAL CHARGE IN THE SAME MANNER, EVEN THOUGH LOGIC DICTATES OTHERWISE. THE AUTOMATED CASE-RATING PROCEDURE PERMITS PROSECUTIVE JUDGMENT TO CONFORM MORE CLOSELY TO THE SPECIFIC FACTS SURROUNDING EACH DEFENDANT AND EACH CRIME. AS DIFFERENCES AMONG CASES BECOME VISIBLE, NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR PROSECUTIVE DISCRETION ARE CREATED: EXERCISE OF POSITIVE MANAGEMENT CONTROL OVER THE CASELOAD; SYSTEMATIC CONSIDERATION OF DIVERSION PROGRAMS FOR DEFENDANTS IN LOW-RANKED CASES; RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING THE SCHEDULING OF TOP-RANKED CASES; AND MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE APPLICATION OF EVENHANDED JUSTICE. THE MANNER IN WHICH PROMIS GENERATES CASE RATINGS IN THE WASHINGTON, D.C., PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE IS DESCRIBED. FOR OTHER ISSUES IN THIS SERIES, SEE NCJ 44750-44751 AND 44753-44770.