THE FIRST STEP IN DEVISING A PREVENTION STRATEGY IS TO DEFINE ACCEPTABLE LEVELS OF CRIME IN TERMS OF THE BALANCE OF SOCIAL GOALS WHICH MUST BE MAINTAINED TO PREVENT WIDESPREAD DISSATISFACTION. BOTH THE ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF CRIME AND THE KINDS OF CRIME WHICH ARE TO BE CONSIDERED MOST SERIOUS (AND PRIME TARGETS FOR REDUCTION) MUST BE DETERMINED LOCALLY SINCE THESE WILL VARY FOR DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE COUNTRY AND DIFFERENT TYPES OF OFFENSES AND OFFENDERS. THEY SHOULD BE DEALT WITH EITHER ACCORDING TO THE TYPE OF RESPONSE FOUND TO BE MOST EFFECTIVE (PUNITIVE, MECHANICAL, OR CORRECTIVE MEASURES) OR BY DETERMINING THE FACTORS MOST VULNERABLE TO INTERVENTION. THIS ARGUES FOR A LOCAL PLANNING AND COORDINATION BODY RESPONSIBLE FOR DEFINING GOALS AND STRATEGIES AND COORDINATING THE VARIOUS AGENCY EFFORTS. THIS ORGAN SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FOCUSING PREVENTIVE ACTIVITIES WITH MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY FOR INNOVATION. THE LIMITED KNOWLEDGE NOW AVAILABLE ON ANY ASPECT OF CRIME PREVENTION SUGGESTS THAT DEVELOPING AND TESTING STRATEGIES WITH SPECIFIC CRIME-REDUCTION OBJECTIVES SHOULD OCCUR BEFORE ANY COMPREHENSIVE STANDARDS ARE SET. THE WORK OF EXPERTS IN CAUSATION AND TREATMENT OF SOCIAL DEVIANCE MUST BE COMMUNICATED TO THE DESIGNERS AND ADMINISTRATORS OF PREVENTION PROGRAMS. DESPITE CONTINUED EMPHASIS IN CRIME PREVENTION THEORY AND PRACTICE ON COMMUNITY ACTION, SOCIAL REFORM, AND REHABILITATION OF THE ENVIRONMENT RATHER THAN THE INDIVIDUAL OFFENDER, IT SEEMS LIKELY THAT THE AREAS IN WHICH PREVENTIVE EFFORTS WILL BE MOST EFFECTIVE ARE CORRECTIONS (PREVENTING RECIDIVISM AND THE DIVERTING OF OFFENDERS OUT OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. PREVENTION PROGRAMS AND CURRENT PREVENTION PROJECTS ARE LISTED, OVER 100 REFERENCES ARE CITED, AND FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED.