PROBLEMS FACING PROBATION INCLUDE A SHORTAGE OF PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL, LARGE CASELOADS, MIXED CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS, AND A LACK OF COMMUNITY SERVICES. CONSEQUENTLY, PROBATION AGENCIES HAVE DEVELOPED NEW PROGRAMS WHICH USE VOLUNTEERS AND PARAPROFESSIONALS, TEAM APPROACHES, SPECIALIZED CASELOADS, AND INTENSIVE PROBATION SERVICES. MOST EVALUATIONS OF PROBATION HAVE FOCUSED ON RECIDIVISM, AND ALTHOUGH IT IS SIGNIFICANT, OTHER FACTORS NEED TO BE ASSESSED. USING 58 DIVERTED OFFENDERS AND A MATCHED COMPARISON SAMPLE DRAWN FROM THE REGULAR AGENCY CASELOAD, THIS STUDY EXAMINED RECIDIVISM, MANAGEMENT OF THE PROGRAM, PERFORMANCES OF THE PROBATION OFFICERS, OFFENDERS' ADJUSTMENT TO SOCIETY, EMPLOYMENT, AND COST SAVINGS TO THE STATE FROM DIVERSION. THE INTENSIVE PROBATION UNIT SELECTED CASES THAT WERE SLATED FOR COMMITMENT TO AN INSTITUTION. PROBATION OFFICERS WERE EACH RESPONSIBLE FOR 25 CASES, HAD TO MAKE CONTACTS WITH CLIENTS 4 TIMES A MONTH, NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT, AND ARRANGE FOR NEEDED SERVICES, PARTICULARLY IN EMPLOYMENT AND COUNSELING. DATA INDICATED THAT THESE OFFICERS DID PROVIDE MORE SERVICES AND CONTACTS TO THEIR CLIENTS THAN THE COMPARISON GROUP RECEIVED. IN TERMS OF RECIDIVISM AND CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR, THE EXPERIMENTAL SAMPLE DID AS WELL AS THE REGULAR PROBATIONERS. THE PROBATION OFFICER WAS FOUND TO BE A SIGNIFICANT INFLUENCE ON THIS OUTCOME. MEASURES OF ADJUSTMENT SHOWED NO DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE GROUPS. THE DIVERSION OF THE OFFENDERS FROM INSTITUTIONS RESULTED IN A SAVINGS OF OVER $212,000, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT PROGRAM COSTS, COURT COSTS, AND RESTITUION. THE EMPLOYMENT RATE FOR THE EXPERIMENTAL SAMPLE INCREASED 7 PERCENT DURING THE PROGRAM, COMPARED TO A 6.4 PERCENT DECREASE FOR THE COMPARISON GROUP, INDICATING THE EXCELLENT SERVICES PROVIDED BY PROBATION OFFICERS IN FINDING JOBS FOR THEIR CLIENTS. IT THUS APPEARS THAT THE INTENSIVE PROBATION PROGRAM WAS GENERALLY SUCCESSFUL AND COST-EFFECTIVE. FUTURE RESEARCH COULD STUDY LONG-TERM EFFECTS, SELECTION CRITERIA, AND REPLICATION. TABLES, FOOTNOTES, AND A BIBLIOGRAPHY ARE PROVIDED. THE APPENDIXES CONTAIN A LIST OF STATES WITH PROBATION LAWS, INFORMATION ON SIMILAR PROGRAMS IN OTHER STATES, SAMPLE EVALUATION FORMS AND CONTRACTS USED IN THE TOLEDO PROJECT, AND POSITIVE ADJUSTMENT RESULTS. (MJM)