The CVCB would compensate those deemed to have been harmed by the offense. The bank would also reimburse some portion of the costs incurred by the criminal justice system. Thus, the offender would have essentially taken out a loan from the bank. The corrections authority would negotiate with the offender and counsel to determine a repayment (restitution) schedule. The amount of the loan would result from determination of such items as the value of any property taken, the repair or replacement costs of damaged property, the loss of use of property, hospitalization and other medical costs, the victim's physical discomfort and mental anguish, and the share of the criminal justice costs directly attributable to the criminal behavior. Offenders who were currently employed could pay restitution out of current income; others would need help in finding a job or in enrolling in a program to acquire skills. Offenders with high incomes would meet their obligations in much shorter time periods than those with low incomes. Such a situation would be inequitable in a correctional system where sentences are measured in time but would be equitable if sentences were denominated in dollars. As with the current system, any individual willing to risk punishment would be free to commit an offense. Although minority groups deprived of education and/or income might object to this restitution model, it might be preferable to the current practices under which minorities constitute almost half of prison populations. Recommendations for further research, notes, an index, and 23 references are provided.