IT IS ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE EFFECTS OF CITIZEN CRIME PREVENTION ACTIVITIES ARE DIFFICULT TO EVALUATE IN A RIGOROUS, SCIENTIFIC MANNER DUE TO THE STATE OF EVALUATION METHODOLOGY, WHICH BREAKS DOWN IN THE ABSENCE OF AN EVENT OR DISPLACEMENT EFFECTS. ALSO, CITIZEN ACTS CANNOT BE MANIPULATED EASILY BY AN EVALUATOR, AND THE KEY ACTIVITIES MAY CONSIST OF INFORMAL INTERACTIONS AND SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURES THAT ARE DIFFICULT TO MEASURE. HOWEVER, IT IS ARGUED THAT THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH LIMITATIONS IS NO REASON TO DISCOURAGE CITIZEN CRIME PREVENTION EFFORTS, PARTICULARLY SINCE THE COST OF SUCH EFFORTS IS NOT THAT HIGH. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT WHERE CITIZEN CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAMS ARE CONSIDERED, RESEARCHERS AND POLICYMAKERS SHOULD GIVE SPECIAL ATTENTION TO EVALUATIVE QUESTIONS THAT CAN BE REASONABLY PURSUED. VARIOUS EVALUATION APPROACHES ARE SUGGESTED. THE VERBALLY REPORTED EFFECT OF A VOLUNTARY CRIME PREVENTION ACTIVITY ON RESIDENTS' BEHAVIOR AND FEELINGS OF SAFETY IS SUGGESTED AS ONE EVALUATION TECHNIQUE. ANOTHER TECHNIQUE INVOLVES MEASURES OF THE PRESUMED EFFECT OF A VOLUNTARY CRIME PREVENTION ACTIVITY ON THE VICTIMIZATION RATES AMONG THE RESIDENTS, ALTHOUGH THIS WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE WITH RECOGNIZED LIMITATIONS AND AT A FAIRLY HIGH COST. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT EVALUATION FOR POSITIVE EFFECTS NOT BE OF CRIME CONSIDERATION IN FUNDING VOLUNTARY CITIZEN CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAMS, SINCE THERE IS SO LITTLE COST INVOLVED. RATHER, IT IS PROPOSED THAT WHERE STRONG SUPPORT FOR A PROGRAM EXISTS, FUNDS SHOULD BE GRANTED UNLESS THERE IS COMPELLING EVIDENCE THAT NEGATIVE EFFECTS WOULD RESULT. REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (RCB)