A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE REVEALS CONTRADICTORY FINDINGS ON THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN STATUS OFFENDERS AND DELINQUENTS. EVIDENCE INDICATES, HOWEVER, THAT A FAIRLY LARGE GROUP OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS RESTRICT THEIR VIOLATIONS TO STATUS OFFENSES, WHILE A SMALL SUBGROUP RECIDIVATES AS PURE STATUS OFFENDERS. ANALYSIS OF DATA FROM AN EVALUATION OF A STATUS OFFENDERS DEINSTITUTIONALIZATION PROGRAM FUNDED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOWED THAT THE 4,000 STATUS OFFENSES STUDIED CONSIST OF 2 DISTINCT GROUPS: A MAJORITY WHO WERE FREE OF RECORDED PRIOR OFFENSES AND THE REMAINDER WHO HAD RECORDS OF ONLY DELINQUENT OFFENSES OR MIXED-DELINQUENT AND STATUS OFFENSES. THE DATA SUGGEST THAT FEMALES WERE MORE LIKELY THAN MALES TO ACQUIRE RECORDS OF STATUS OFFENSES. CERTAIN COMBINATIONS OF AGE, GENDER, AND ETHNICITY WERE LIKELY TO INCREASE THE PROABILITY OF AN OFFENDER HAVING A PRIOR RECORD OF DELINQUENCY. YOUTHS MARGINALLY INVOLVED IN STATUS OFFENDER BEHAVIOR WERE NOT LIKELY TO BECOME DELINQUENTS, BUT IF THESE ACTIVITIES BECAME CHRONIC, THE JUVENILES WERE AS LIKELY TO COMMIT MORE SERIOUS OFFENSES AS STATUS OFFENSES. THIS STUDY DID NOT SUBSTANTIATE THE THEORY THAT TRADITIONAL COURT PROCESSES INCREASE THE LIKELIHOOD OF PROGRESSION FROM STATUS TO DELINQUENT OFFENDER, BUT IT DID SHOW THAT CONFINEMENT IS NOT NECESSARY FOR CERTAIN GROUPS OF STATUS OFFENDERS. TABLES, NOTES, AND REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (MJM)