Community-Led Violence Intervention: Lessons from Three Evidence-Based Models
In recent years, few issues have animated politics in cities across the country as much as concerns over crime. Although public perceptions of crime improved slightly from 2023 to 2024, the percentage of Americans concerned about crime hit an all-time high in 2023, with nearly two thirds describing crime in the U.S. as “very” or “extremely” serious. At the same time, high-profile incidents of misconduct have undermined trust in law enforcement and accelerated calls for public safety reform. For local leaders everywhere, responding to these dynamics simultaneously has been a significant challenge.
Fortunately, rigorous evidence has begun pointing the way towards effective approaches to prevent violent crime before it escalates. Community Violence Intervention (CVI) programs have shown promising results in communities across the United States, with successful implementation efforts reducing violent crime, building public trust, and creating positive trajectories for those at high levels of risk.
Background: Violent Crime in the United States
The research is unambiguous — exposure to violent crime is disastrous for individuals’ ability to thrive. Direct victims of violent crime suffer tremendously, but even those who are not directly impacted experience harmful effects. Simply living in a community with high rates of violence is associated with a range of negative outcomes, including diminished academic achievement in children and poorer health outcomes across all age groups.
Sadly, many Americans are exposed to high levels of violence. Each year, over 1.2 million violent crimes occur in the United States, and the per capita rate of gun homicide in the United States is far higher than rates in peer countries. While the national rate of violent crime has declined significantly since a peak in the 1990s, incidents increased meaningfully during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nationwide homicide rates have since fallen below pre-pandemic levels, but other violent crimes (such as assault and carjacking) remain higher than in 2019.
A Promising Solution: Community Violence Intervention (CVI)
CVI programs have emerged as promising ways to reduce violence that are led by communities, rather than by law enforcement. These programs seek to prevent and disrupt cycles of violence by de-escalating emerging conflicts and/or providing services to the individuals most at risk of perpetrating or experiencing violence. Typically, these interventions aim to help individuals and groups to resolve disputes, address trauma, improve their mental and behavioral health, and pursue more positive life trajectories.
While CVI models vary in their specific approaches, they often share a few key characteristics. First, because violent crime tends to be concentrated in specific neighborhoods and among a small subset of the population, CVI programs tend to focus on the geographies and individuals at the very highest levels of risk. Second, CVI programs tend to hire staff with a high degree of credibility among their target population–staff are often from the neighborhoods they serve and have lived experiences similar to those they are trying to reach. As such, they are uniquely positioned to reach and positively influence people at risk. Third, because the individuals that CVI programs seek to serve tend to be disconnected from school, work, and other community institutions, programs typically conduct “relentless” outreach, often contacting individuals dozens of times before persuading them to take advantage of services.
Leading Examples of CVI Programs
Three programs — Cure Violence, Roca, and READI Chicago – reflect these principles and have demonstrated positive results in rigorous evaluations.
Cure Violence primarily engages in violence interruption, where trained staff with influence and credibility in the community build relationships with young people, de-escalate conflict, and connect individuals to services. The program ultimately seeks to shift the individual beliefs and group norms that perpetuate violence and retaliation. The program was first established in Chicago in 2000, and it now operates in more than three dozen communities across the world, including in San Antonio, TX; Omaha, NE; and Chester, PA.
While Cure Violence and other violence interruption-focused programs operate on the “front lines” of street-level violence in specific geographies, programs like Roca and READI Chicago focus on providing intensive services to the specific individuals at the highest levels of risk of committing or experiencing violence. Target participants are recruited “relentlessly,” and once enrolled, they engage in cognitive behavioral therapy-informed programming, restorative justice activities, and paid workforce training and employment.
Roca was founded in Chelsea, MA in 1988 and now operates in seven cities across the Northeast, including Boston, MA; Holyoke, MA; and Hartford, CT. Since its launch, Roca has served over 1,800 young men. Among participants enrolled in the program 24 months or longer, 89 percent had no new arrests. Local leaders and program staff point to Roca’s close relationship with justice system partners, its focus on addressing participants’ trauma, and its “relentless” approach to outreach as the program’s strengths.
READI Chicago, developed by the Crime Lab at the University of Chicago and administered by the Heartland Alliance, first launched in 2017. Six community-based organizations with strong ties to their neighborhoods deliver programming. An evaluation found that participants who were referred to the program by one of these organizations were 79% less likely to be arrested for a shooting than their peers. Evaluation findings suggest that referrals from established community organizations are key to success: participants who were referred by READI’s community partners experienced more significant reductions in firearm-related arrests and victimizations than their peers who were identified through other channels (predictive algorithms or local prison staff).
Funding CVI Programs
Because CVI programs seek to de-escalate conflict and prevent violent crime from occurring, they can yield downstream cost savings by reducing public expenditures on arrest, prosecution, and incarceration. Experts agree that CVI programs often yield an outsized return on investment. However, funding for such programs has been inconsistent. One leader in Chicago shared, “[There is] not enough regular funding and consistent funding for CVI. In some cities, it’s sporadic, where you may have a dosage of funding that comes along, and then you have a dry spell.”
The Biden administration made historic investments in CVI programs nationwide, but subsequent cuts reduced federal funding for violence prevention efforts by over $800 million. Instability can undermine long-term efforts: CVI approaches are built on trust and persistence, and suddenly cancelling a local program can damage the goodwill that has been carefully cultivated in a community. Local leaders need not rely on federal funding, though — they have an opportunity to make sustained, multi-year investments in community-led programs with local government funds.
Taking Action
For local leaders seeking community-centered ways to reduce violent crime, CVI programs offer a promising path forward. Cities such as St. Louis, Baltimore, and Chicago offer real-world examples of how successful CVI approaches have been implemented in practice.
Looking to dive deeper? These resources summarize best practices and can form a blueprint for communities interested in implementing CVI programs:
This blog was written by Beth Alberty, Cole Ware, and Ross Tilchin