Despite the increasing use of Community Violence Intervention (CVI) programs in jurisdictions around the country, evidence of the strategy’s effectiveness is promising but as yet inconclusive, according to an analysis by the Research and Evaluation Center at John Jay College.
The White House championed CVI’s as part of President Joe Biden’s comprehensive strategy to prevent and respond to gun crime and public safety, according to a 2021 White House Fact Sheet.
As part of the efforts, Biden announced a CVI collaborative group of 16 jurisdictions using federal funds to build or strengthen their local “CVI infrastructure.”
According to the White House Fact Sheet, CVI programs reduced violence by as much as 60 percent.
“These programs are effective because they leverage trusted messengers who work directly with individuals most likely to commit gun violence, intervene in conflicts, and connect people to social, health and wellness, and economic services to reduce the likelihood of violence as an answer to conflict,” the White House Fact Sheet says.
The federal government defines CVI as: evidence-based strategies that include focused deterrence, street outreach and hospital-based violence intervention models, complete with wraparound services such as behavioral therapy, trauma recovery, job training, education, housing and relocation services, and financial assistance.
The most promising programs are those oriented to grassroots needs, using the resources of neighborhoods and residents themselves, and which operate separately from law enforcement and traditional human services.
The analysis terms these strategies as Community Violence Interventions at the Roots (or CVI-R).
But evidence of the efficacy of CVI-R programs remains inconclusive, says the Center analysis.
Two Promising Programs
Advance Peace and Cure Violence are two CVI-R approaches that have proven effective but have not reached an “evidence-based” distinction, according to researchers.
Advance Peace, which began in California in 2018, focuses on individual and community-based resources. Researchers studied its impact on homicides and assaults in Sacramento from July 2018 to December 2019 and found a decrease in homicides and violent assaults in the three Advance Peace zones studied.
In non-program zones, there was a slight increase in homicides and assaults during the same period. However, data from the entire city also showed decreased gun homicides and violent assaults.
Cure Violence, the more proven and better-known strategy, takes a public health approach.
The program deploys “Violence Interrupters” who form mentoring relationships with at-risk youth and serve as mediators in confrontational situations. Outreach workers then link the residents to the appropriate services they may need.
The analysis said more research into grassroots Community Violence Interventions was necessary to establish them as effective and worthwhile practices.
“Evaluations show promising results, but many lawmakers are skeptical of any model not directly associated with law enforcement or conventional social services,” the study concluded.
“The violence prevention field must confront these challenges, and advocates need more than political rhetoric and ideology.”
“Sustainable progress requires evidence. Researchers must work closely with policymakers and community groups to answer these important questions using rigorous evaluations of CVI-R processes and outcomes.”
Editor’s Note: Another recent study singled out violence interrupters as first responders who are often most vulnerable to trauma and victimization. The study recommended special training and efforts to improve their working conditions.
Authors of the study were Katheryne Pugliese, Paul Odér, Talib Hudson, and Jeffrey A. Butts, director of the John Jay Center for Research and Evaluation.
Read the full report here.
James Van Bramer is Associate Editor of The Crime Report.