Juveniles were assigned to one of three levels of probation supervision (no supervision or services, routine supervision and voluntary services, and intensive supervision with discretionary services) or one of three youth corrections intervention (community placement in foster care, group homes, or other community placement; diagnostic placement and subsequent assignment to some type of intervention; or secure placements of at least 6 months). Results indicate that the court's sentencing decisions were commensurate with the juveniles' needs and a concern for public safety. Data clearly indicate that youth can be safely returned to the community after relatively short periods of confinement. The vast majority of youth (53 to 81 percent of all youths) were rearrested at least once during the followup period. While rearrest rates declined for probationers, no differences in the levels or timing of recidivism were found across the three groups. Similarly, while juveniles in youth corrections interventions also showed high recidivism rates, there were large declines in the rate of offending for all three groups. Results highlight the need for careful diagnosis and risk assessment and for the design of creative probation services that respond to diagnosed needs. 3 exhibits.