JUVENILE COURT DISPOSITIONS WERE REVIEWED FOR A 4-WEEK PERIOD TO DETERMINE THOSE DISPOSITIONS IN WHICH RESTITUTION WAS ORDERED AS A PROBATION CONDITION FOR JUVENILES ADJUDICATED IN SOUTH ST. LOUIS COUNTY, DULUTH, MINNESOTA. INTERVIEWS THEN WERE CONDUCTED WITH 12 TEENAGERS HAVING OBTAINED RESTITUTION ORDERS, 11 VICTIMS WHO WERE UNAWARE OF THE RESTITUTION ORDERS, 11 PARENTS, 16 PROBATION OFFICERS, AND 11 POLICE OFFICERS TO DETERMINE THE EXTENT TO WHICH THESE PARTIES PERCEIVED RESTITUTION AS FAIR SANCTION IN SPECIFIC VICTIMIZATIONS. SEVENTEEN DISPOSITIONS INVOLVED A RESTITUTION REQUIREMENT AND SEVEN DID NOT. RESTITUTION TENDED TO BE USED WITH OLDER OFFENDERS WHO WERE APPEARING IN COURT FOR THE FIRST TIME AND WHOSE CASES WERE CONTINUED UNDER INFORMAL SUPERVISION. GENERALLY, RESTITUTION WAS PERCEIVED BY RESPONDENTS AS FAIR FOR THE YOUTH; MORE OF THE VICTIMS, PROBATION OFFICERS, AND POLICE OFFICERS HELD THIS VIEW THAN DID YOUTHS OR PARENTS. PARENTS AND YOUTH WERE QUITE OPTIMISTIC THAT THE OFFENDERS WOULD FULFILL THE RESTITUTION OBLIGATION BUT VICTIMS WERE NOT OPTIMISTIC. VICTIMS TENDED TO SUPPORT RESTITUTION BUT OFFENDERS PREFERRED RESTITUTION ONLY IN CONJUNCTION WITH PROBATION, AND PREFERRED PROBATION TO RESTITUTION AS A SINGLE SANCTION. FUTHERMORE, THE FINDINGS SHOW THAT THERE IS VERY LITTLE COMMUNICATION BETWEEN COURT OFFICIALS AND RESTITUTION VICTIMS. BECAUSE THIS WAS AN EXPLORATORY STUDY IN A SINGLE JURISDICTION WITH A SMALL SAMPLE, RESULTS CANNOT BE GENERALIZED. FURTHER RESEARCH IS SUGGESTED. STUDY DATA AND REFERENCES ARE APPENDED. AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED--MJW)