Sentencing alternatives such as restitution and community service reinforced the sanctions of probation and fines instead of replacing incarceration. Similarly, postincarceration release programs such as work release and work furlough often escalated the level of control over clients and served primarily to control prison populations. Increasing the availability of community corrections facilities has not reduced prison populations; it has merely changed the place of imprisonment from State institutions to county jails. Moreover, initial declines in State prison commitments can be neutralized by modifying other sentencing or release policies, resulting in an increase of prison populations over time. Although community corrections legislation may have redistributed costs and shifted decisionmaking from State to local levels, it is questionable whether it has made a long-term contribution to reduced imprisonment. Progress in alternatives will be frustrated until reforms are more carefully implemented and until proponents of alternatives are willing to test theories through rigorous research. A new political consensus must emerge outside the criminal justice system in which punishment and public safety are rationally balanced against fiscal constraints and competing claims for public revenue. Graphs, tables, and footnotes are supplied; 36 studies are cited. (Author abstract modified)