STUDIES ANALYZING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PROBATION EFFECTIVENESS AND CASELOAD SIZE ARE REVIEWED TO REVEAL THAT A REDUCTION IN CASELOAD, WITH ALL OTHER FACTORS REMAINING REASONABLY CONSTANT, DOES NOT ASSURE A REDUCTION OF RECIDIVISM. IT IS BELIEVED THAT OTHER MANAGEMENT FACTORS MAY, THEREFORE, BE MORE IMPORTANT THAN CASELOAD SIZE. THE ADEQUACY AND GENERAL NATURE OF PROBATION SUPERVISION AND ITS ADMINISTRATION ARE SUGGESTED AS POTENTIALLY MORE PRODUCTIVE FOCUSES FOR STUDY. THE LACK OF SYSTEMATIC INVESTIGATION OF PROCEDURES MATCHING PROBATION OFFICERS AND OFFENDERS IS NOTED. THE WORKLOAD CONCEPT OF PROBATION SUPERVISION, BASED ON THE VIEW THAT OFFENDERS REQUIRE VARYING DEGREES OF SUPERVISION, IS REVIEWED. UNDER ONE SUCH MODEL CONSIDERED, PROBATIONERS ARE PLACED IN SUPERVISION CATEGORIES ACCORDING TO JUDGMENTS OF THEIR 'RISK' (LIKELIHOOD OF VIOLATION) AND NEED FOR SERVICES. THE INTENT IS TO ALLOCATE WORKLOADS TO OFFICERS BASED ON A PREDETERMINATION OF THE TIME AND RESOURCES NEEDED TO DEAL EFFECTIVELY WITH EACH PROBATIONER. A NUMBER OF STUDIES ANALYZING PROBATION VERSUS INSTITUTIONALIZATION FOUND THAT MANY OFFENDERS SENTENCED TO PRISON COULD PERFORM WELL ON PROBATION. THIS SEEMS TRUE PARTICULARLY FOR FIRST OFFENDERS, ALTHOUGH NOT FOR MULTIPLE FELONY OFFENDERS. THIS RAISES THE POLICY ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT TO AIM AT REDUCING PRISON POPULATIONS AND DIVERTING EXPENDITURES TO AN EXPANSION OF WELL-DESIGNED PROBATION PROGRAMS. NOTES ARE PROVIDED.