Although Senate Bill No. 512 reduced the vague grounds by which the system initiated intervention with status offenders, the Committee was concerned with the lack of definitions, whether the juvenile court should retain jurisdiction over the status offender, the need to review the direction and responsibility of other agencies dealing with these youth, and the need for rules and statutes to guide juvenile courts. The Committee examined the effects of existing statutes, rules, and local practices on status offenders, proposed standards and laws from other States, and the existing literature. It also surveyed 43 judicial circuits about their attitudes and intent toward status offenders. Missouri uses a 'no label' system whereby no formal process for categorizing youths brought before the court exists, but status offenders are dealt with according to their needs. The survey showed that juvenile court officers felt the juvenile court should retain jurisdiction over status offenders. While the Committee supports that position, it advocates the courts use the information adjustment process as the prime means to dispose of status offense cases and employ formal court action only as a last resort. It also recommends changes in the intake, detention, and disposition processes. Although survey respondents were overwhelmingly supportive of the use of secure detention for status offenders, the Committee supports the standard of the least restrictive custody. It suggests the court's range of alternative dispositions be broadened. Finally, the Committee recommends that the juvenile court improve its coordination with community resources, particularly the school districts and the Division of Family Services. In addition to specific recommendations, the report includes an executive summary, footnotes, six references, and a list of Committee members.