Particular issues examined are the lower courts and the lower probation, the relationship between misdmeanant probation and the unified State court system movement, the philosophy and practice of misdemeanor probation management, the misdemeanor probation interface with the judiciary, sentencing bias and misdemeanor probation and citizen participation, and change and the future of misdemeanor probation. The review shows that on the positive side, a number of probation departments, both separate misdemeanor probation entities as well as combined agencies which provide misdemeanor and felony probation services, perform competently. These professional organizations are often well managed, maintain good working relationships with the judiciary, and use systematized caseload classification schemes. Further, they provide short-form presentence reports to assist judicial sentencing practices, and draw heavily on existing community agencies to augment direct probation services. Volunteers are used in a variety of ways, and some agencies administer pretrial release and pretrial diversion programs. Probation services in misdemeanor courts, on the other hand, are often weak; presentence reports are not done at all or only occasionally; caseloads total from 100 to 200 and beyond; and any significant service is provided by volunteers who cannot fulfill the total need. In many cases, probation departments are bastions of judicial patronage and tend to have little or no professional direction. Overall, this is a reflection of the low status held by misdemeanor courts in many jurisdictions. Tables, 24 notes, and 37 references are listed.