DISPUTE SETTLEMENT IN CIVIL OR CRIMINAL COURT CAN RESULT IN LONG DELAYS SUCH AS IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES THAT TAKE OVER 4 YEARS TO PROCESS IN SOME LARGE CITIES. HIGH COURTS, WAGE FORFEITURES, PROBLEMS OF UNRESOLVED TENSIONS IN DROPPED CASES, AND THE UNSUITABILITY OF THE ADVERSARY PROCESS IN RESOLVING DIFFERENCES HAVE LED CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROFESSIONALS TO EXPLORE MEDIATION AS AN ALTERNATIVE. THIS PROCESS RELIES ON A THIRD PARTY WHO HELPS DISPUTANTS REACH AN AGREEMENT BUT DOES NOT COMPEL A RESOLUTION. ARBITRATION DECISION ON THE OTHER HAND, MAY BE ENFORCEABLE OR MERELY ADVISORY. MEDIATION PROGRAMS INCLUDE THE COLUMBUS NIGHT PROSECUTORS PROGRAM, FUNDED BY LEAA; THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR DISPUTE SETTLEMENT, ESTABLISHED BY THE AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION; AND THE NEW YORK INSTITUTE FOR MEDIATION AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION DISPUTE CENTER, SPONSORED BY THE INSTITUTE FOR MEDIATION AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION. THE DORCHESTER URBAN COURT PROGRAM ALSO OPERATES DISPOSITION AND VICTIM SERVICE COMPONENTS. OTHER NOTABLE INNOVATIONS INCLUDE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD JUSTICE CENTERS IN 1977 AND THE OPERATION OF 20 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROGRAMS BETWEEN 1970 AND 1977. THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION ACT OF 1979 ESTABLISHES A NATIONAL CLEARINGHOUSE FOR INFORMATION AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND PROVIDES INCENTIVE GRANTS FOR INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO DISPUTE RESOLUTION. NOTES ARE PROVIDED AND A CHARTED COMPARISON OF MASSACHUSETTS' MEDIATION PROGRAMS IS PRESENTED.