Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Cure Violence

Cure Violence is a public health-oriented intervention strategy founded in 2000 by epidemiologist Gary Slutkin that conceptualizes interpersonal violence, particularly gun violence in urban areas, as a contagious epidemic requiring detection, interruption, and behavioral norm shifts rather than solely punitive measures.^[1]^[2] The program employs "violence interrupters"—typically individuals with past involvement in street life or gangs—as outreach workers to mediate disputes, de-escalate potential retaliatory acts, and foster community changes that discourage violence, drawing from disease control principles Slutkin observed in his prior work on epidemics like tuberculosis and AIDS in Africa.^[3]^[1] Originating as the Chicago Project for Violence Prevention (later CeaseFire), the model gained traction for reported drops in shootings in targeted neighborhoods, such as up to 52% reductions in killings in early Chicago implementations, and has since expanded to dozens of U.S. cities, including New York and Baltimore, as well as international sites like Colombia and Trinidad and Tobago.^[4] A systematic review of 13 evaluations across 27 sites documented 83 outcomes, with 68.7% indicating reductions in shootings or killings—though only 32.5% were statistically significant—and notable geographic inconsistencies, such as weaker effects in Baltimore compared to Chicago or New York, where one analysis linked it to a 14% drop in shootings.^[4]^[5] These results stem largely from observational and time-series methods, limiting causal inferences amid confounding factors like concurrent policing or economic shifts, and the review itself was authored by Cure Violence Global affiliates, raising concerns over selective reporting.^[4] Despite claims of cost-effectiveness and scalability, the approach faces scrutiny for inconsistent impacts, as evidenced by a St. Louis evaluation showing no declines in homicides or gun assaults post-implementation, and operational challenges including interrupter recidivism or criminal entanglements, such as a former staffer's federal drug conviction in New Orleans.^[2]^[6] Critics argue that relying on ex-offenders for mediation risks reinforcing illicit networks or failing to address underlying drivers like family breakdown or economic despair, with program fidelity often undermined by funding volatility and political interference, underscoring the need for rigorous, independent randomized trials to validate purported contagion-breaking mechanisms.^[2]^[7]

Origins and History

Founding in Chicago

Gary Slutkin, an epidemiologist and physician who had spent a decade at the World Health Organization directing large-scale interventions against tuberculosis, AIDS, and cholera epidemics in Africa and Asia, returned to the United States in the mid-1990s and joined the University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health. Observing patterns of urban violence in Chicago that mirrored contagious disease outbreaks—such as clustering, rapid spread through social networks, and susceptibility in high-risk groups—he proposed treating violence as a public health epidemic controllable through interruption, norm change, and behavior alteration rather than solely punitive measures. This first-principles approach drew from his experience in disease control, emphasizing detection of "transmission opportunities" (like retaliation risks) and targeted interventions to break cycles.^[8]^[9] In 1995, Slutkin established the Chicago Project for Violence Prevention as an umbrella initiative at the university to research and apply these methods systematically, partnering with community organizations, law enforcement, and public health entities to address violence's root dynamics empirically. The project focused on data-driven strategies, including mapping violence hotspots and mobilizing credible community messengers to detect and defuse conflicts before escalation. Initial efforts built on prior local experiments like the Little Village Gang Violence Reduction Project but innovated by framing violence explicitly as an infectious process amenable to epidemiological tools, such as contact tracing analogs for feuds and vaccination-like norm shifts against retaliation.^[10]^[11] The flagship program, CeaseFire (later rebranded as Cure Violence), launched its first implementation zone in June 2000 in Chicago Police District 11, encompassing West Garfield Park, one of the city's most violence-afflicted areas with homicide rates exceeding national averages. This pilot employed "violence interrupters"—former offenders with street credibility—to mediate disputes, enforce behavioral norms against shootings, and connect at-risk individuals to social services, achieving early reductions in shootings through real-time conflict resolution. Evaluations noted 16-35% drops in gunfire incidents in initial sites compared to control areas, validating the model's causal focus on interrupting transmission over broader socioeconomic fixes alone, though scalability challenges emerged due to staffing demands and fidelity to protocols. By 2004, CeaseFire expanded to additional neighborhoods, with independent audits confirming sustained impacts attributable to the intervention's targeted disruption of retaliatory chains.^[12]^[13]

Expansion and Key Milestones

Following its initial implementation in Chicago, Cure Violence expanded to Baltimore in 2007, marking the first site outside Illinois.^[14] Between 2000 and 2008, the program grew rapidly within the United States to include additional cities such as New York, New Orleans, Oakland, and Loíza in Puerto Rico.^[1] In 2008, Cure Violence achieved its first international milestone with a program launch in Iraq, adapting the model to address sectarian violence.^[14] By 2012, the approach was adopted in New York City neighborhoods including East New York and Crown Heights, integrating with local anti-gun violence efforts.^[15] As of December 2015, implementations covered 23 U.S. cities with over 50 sites and extended to international partners.^[3] Growth continued, with evaluations associating early sites—such as a 67% reduction in shootings in one Chicago community during its first year—with increased adoption by municipalities.^[16] In subsequent years, Cure Violence Global supported expansions to regions like the Middle East, Latin America, and the Caribbean; notable sites include 52 programs across Cali, Colombia, and operations in Culiacán, Mexico, since 2020.^[17] As of 2024, U.S. programs operate in more than 25 cities across 17 states and Washington, D.C., alongside active efforts in at least eight countries.^[18] ^[17] Key recognitions included epidemiologist Gary Slutkin's invitation to the State of the Union address and a visit by First Lady Laura Bush to Chicago sites, highlighting national interest in scaling the model.^[14]

Theoretical Foundation

Public Health Epidemic Model

The Public Health Epidemic Model frames violence as a self-perpetuating contagion that spreads through social exposure and learned behavior, analogous to infectious diseases controlled via epidemiological interventions. Developed by epidemiologist Gary Slutkin, who applied insights from stemming epidemics like cholera, tuberculosis, and AIDS in Africa, the model identifies retaliatory cycles—where one violent incident prompts further acts of vengeance—as the primary transmission mechanism, rather than viewing violence solely as a product of socioeconomic deprivation or personal failings.^[9]^[19] This perspective shifts focus from broad deterrence to targeted disruption of interpersonal conflict chains, positing that violence clusters in high-risk networks much like disease outbreaks in vulnerable populations.^[20] Central to the model are three strategies borrowed from World Health Organization protocols for reversing epidemics: detecting and interrupting transmission, treating highest-risk carriers, and altering community norms to build immunity against spread. Interruption involves deploying frontline workers—often former offenders with street credibility—to monitor hotspots, mediate disputes in real time, and de-escalate potential retaliations before they escalate into shootings or homicides.^[21]^[22] High-risk case management targets individuals most prone to initiating or responding violently, providing customized support such as counseling, job placement, or family mediation to reduce their "infectivity." Norm change efforts include public campaigns and community mobilizations to delegitimize violence as a response to disrespect or loss, fostering collective rejection akin to anti-smoking or vaccination drives.^[23]^[24] The model's assumptions rest on causal realism: violence exhibits dose-response patterns, where repeated exposure heightens susceptibility, and interventions must prioritize immediacy over long-term structural reforms to halt acute outbreaks. It operates independently of law enforcement, emphasizing non-coercive influence through trusted insiders to avoid alienating affected groups.^[25] However, the contagion metaphor has drawn scrutiny for being primarily analogical rather than literal, with some analysts contending it risks underemphasizing entrenched factors like gang economics or policy failures, potentially framing symptoms as the disease itself.^[26] Proponents counter that empirical patterns of violence clustering—such as spikes following high-profile incidents—validate the transmissibility lens, enabling scalable, data-driven responses over punitive models with limited reach in insular communities.^[4]

Core Principles and Assumptions

Cure Violence conceptualizes violence as a contagious disease that spreads through social contagion, particularly via retaliation cycles, learned behaviors, and peer influence within high-risk communities, akin to an infectious epidemic rather than solely a criminal justice issue.^[27]^[19] This assumption posits that violent acts function as "transmission events," where exposure to violence increases the likelihood of further outbreaks, treatable through epidemiological interventions rather than punitive measures alone.^[18] The model draws parallels to historical public health successes, such as smallpox eradication, by applying principles of detection, interruption, and prevention to curb the "spread" without assuming violence is biologically infectious but socially propagated.^[24] At its foundation, the program relies on three core strategies derived from epidemic control: detecting and interrupting potential transmissions of violence, altering behaviors and norms among high-risk individuals, and mobilizing broader community support for nonviolent resolutions. Interruption involves deploying "credible messengers"—typically former offenders with street credibility—to mediate conflicts in real time, de-escalate disputes, and prevent retaliatory acts before they escalate.^[28] Behavior change targets the "highest potential transmitters," such as active gang members, through customized outreach, counseling, and incentives to adopt nonviolent paths, assuming that influencing a small subset of prolific actors yields disproportionate reductions in overall violence.^[29] Community mobilization assumes widespread endorsement of anti-violence norms is essential, achieved via public education campaigns, partnerships with local leaders, and efforts to shift cultural acceptance of retaliation.^[3] Underlying these strategies are assumptions about human agency and social dynamics: violence interrupters must possess cultural competence and personal history in affected communities to gain trust and effect change, as outsiders lack the requisite legitimacy.^[30] The model presumes that violence is reversible through non-coercive, voluntary interventions, prioritizing persuasion over enforcement, and that sustained reductions require ongoing, localized adaptation rather than one-size-fits-all policies.^[27] It further assumes measurable indicators, such as shootings or homicides in targeted areas, can track "epidemic" progress, treating drops as evidence of interrupted transmission chains.^[25]

Implementation and Operations

Violence Interruption Techniques

Violence interrupters in the Cure Violence model, typically recruited from the local community and often including former offenders with established street credibility, are tasked with detecting and mediating conflicts to prevent retaliatory violence.^[21]^[18] These individuals operate within designated high-risk "catchment areas," using their personal relationships and knowledge of local dynamics to identify brewing disputes, such as those arising from prior shootings or gang tensions.^[21] Detection relies on proactive intelligence gathering, including tips from community members, monitoring of social media, surveillance of hotspots like street corners or after-school gatherings, and ongoing outreach to high-risk individuals flagged through program databases.^[3]^[4] Upon identifying a potential violent event, interrupters respond immediately, often within hours, to intervene directly.^[21] Techniques emphasize de-escalation through persuasion rather than coercion, leveraging the interrupter's respect within the community to separate parties, facilitate face-to-face mediations, and highlight the personal and communal costs of retaliation, such as incarceration or loss of life.^[3]^[31] In group disputes, interrupters may broker truces by convening leaders or using neutral venues for dialogue, while in individual crises, they provide on-site calming and connect parties to social services if underlying issues like grief or substance use contribute to escalation.^[4] Follow-up efforts include repeated contacts to monitor compliance and prevent resurgence of conflict, with documentation of interventions to inform broader program strategies.^[3] Interrupters undergo specialized training, typically 40-80 hours initially and ongoing refreshers, covering conflict resolution, cultural sensitivity, crisis response protocols, and the public health framing of violence to reinforce non-violent norms during interventions.^[27] This distinguishes them from outreach workers, who focus on long-term behavior change, allowing interrupters to prioritize acute, street-level disruptions.^[31] Programs maintain 24/7 response capabilities, with teams structured to cover shifts and ensure rapid deployment, as delays in intervention can allow conflicts to transmit akin to infectious outbreaks.^[21]^[4]

Outreach and Norm-Change Efforts

Outreach workers in Cure Violence programs, often recruited from the local community and including individuals with prior involvement in violence or gangs for enhanced credibility, build ongoing relationships with high-risk individuals such as at-risk youth and those identified as potential perpetrators or victims.^[18]^[32] These workers engage in mentoring, connect participants to social services like job training or substance abuse treatment, and encourage adoption of non-violent conflict resolution, aiming to alter personal behaviors that perpetuate violence cycles.^[18]^[33] In response to shootings or conflicts, outreach staff also organize immediate community gatherings to reinforce anti-violence messaging and prevent retaliation.^[33] Norm-change initiatives focus on shifting broader community attitudes that tolerate or glorify violence, treating it as a cultural contagion amenable to intervention.^[3] Programs mobilize religious leaders, elected officials, and civic groups to publicly denounce violence and endorse peaceful norms, often through coordinated statements or events following incidents.^[3] Public education campaigns disseminate messages via media, flyers, and workshops emphasizing violence's consequences and alternatives, while enlisting influencers to model norm adherence.^[3]^[34] Community responses to every reported act of violence, including rapid mobilization for anti-retaliation efforts, reinforce these shifts by framing violence as unacceptable rather than inevitable.^[34]

Staffing, Training, and Oversight

Cure Violence programs primarily staff frontline workers as "credible messengers," individuals recruited from the targeted communities who possess firsthand experience with violence, often including past involvement in gangs or criminal activity, to leverage their established trust and rapport with high-risk individuals.^[35] ^[21] These workers include violence interrupters responsible for detecting emerging conflicts, mediating disputes, and implementing risk reduction strategies, as well as outreach workers focused on identifying high-risk persons, providing mentorship, and promoting norm changes against violence.^[36] ^[3] Program sites typically require interrupters to demonstrate street credibility, conflict mediation skills, and familiarity with local dynamics, with many positions prioritizing candidates with backgrounds in community outreach or system-impacted experiences over formal education.^[37] ^[38] Training for these staff emphasizes the public health model's application to violence prevention, covering techniques for conflict interruption, de-escalation, strategic engagement planning, and behavior change interventions, delivered through structured programs by Cure Violence Global's veteran trainers.^[39] ^[40] Initial training, often spanning several days to weeks, equips interrupters with tools to assess conflict risks, determine mediation strategies, and document interventions, with ongoing sessions reinforcing fidelity to the model across more than 20 years of program refinement.^[39] ^[27] Supervisors and program managers receive additional instruction in data analysis, site coordination, and ensuring adherence to core components like high-risk individual tracking. Oversight mechanisms include hierarchical supervision where program managers review interrupter activities, validate interventions against local violence data, and adjust strategies via monthly Key Indicator Program reports tracking metrics such as conflict mediations and shooting incidents.^[41] ^[36] Sites maintain organizational structures with an oversight entity—often a nonprofit or health department—responsible for performance monitoring, collaboration with law enforcement for real-time data, and fidelity checks to the model's five required components, including staff deployment during high-risk periods.^[42] ^[27] This data-driven supervision aims to sustain intervention effectiveness, though implementation reviews note challenges in consistent application across sites due to varying local capacities.^[35]

Funding and Sustainability

Primary Funding Sources

Cure Violence Global, as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, derives the majority of its funding from government grants at federal, state, and local levels, supplemented by philanthropic contributions. In fiscal year 2020, contributions—which encompass grants and donations—constituted over 40% of total revenue, amounting to approximately $1.59 million out of $3.69 million reported.^[43] Federal funding, particularly through the U.S. Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), supports core operations via the Community Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative (CVIPI), which allocates resources for evidence-informed violence reduction programs in targeted communities.^[44] This initiative, part of the Office of Justice Programs (OJP), has been a primary conduit for multimillion-dollar awards to Cure Violence affiliates since its establishment under the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act in 2022.^[45] State and municipal governments provide additional grants tailored to local implementations, often through requests for proposals (RFPs) that fund violence interrupter teams and outreach efforts. For instance, counties like Anne Arundel in Maryland have issued dedicated Violence Interruption Program grants to Cure Violence partners for community-based mediation.^[46] Illinois state budgets have historically allocated funds for Chicago-area programs, though recent proposals in 2025 threatened cuts to such allocations amid broader fiscal reviews.^[47] Philanthropic support from foundations forms a smaller but strategic portion of funding, focusing on capacity-building and evaluation. The Ford Foundation awarded grants to Cure Violence Global, including core support in 2023 for integrating gender-based violence prevention into community strategies and for evidence-building on best practices.^[48] Other partnerships, such as with the AAA-ICDR Foundation in 2022, have funded training enhancements for violence prevention workers, though these represent targeted rather than baseline operational revenue.^[49] Occasional federal agency grants, like those from the Department of Homeland Security for extremism prevention pilots, provide episodic boosts but are not core to sustained programming.^[50] Overall, reliance on public sector grants exposes the model to annual budget cycles and policy shifts, as evidenced by 2025 federal reductions to OJP's CVIPI funding.^[45]

Budget Challenges and Political Influences

Cure Violence initiatives frequently encounter budget instability stemming from their dependence on time-limited grants from federal, state, and municipal sources, which can abruptly terminate or diminish, forcing programs to scale back operations or cease activities.^[4] In Philadelphia, for example, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) grant cuts announced in May 2025 eliminated approximately $1.5 million allocated to local anti-violence programs, including Cure Violence affiliates, contributing to broader federal reductions of over $800 million in nationwide grants for community safety efforts.^[51] Similarly, in Washington, D.C.'s Ward 1, the mayor's June 2025 budget proposal halved funding for violence interruption programs and fully eliminated the Cure the Streets initiative, highlighting local fiscal reallocations amid competing priorities.^[52] These financial pressures have manifested in operational deficits, such as understaffed outreach teams or incomplete implementation, which evaluations link to diminished program fidelity and potential reductions in violence interruption efficacy.^[4] A 2025 systematic review of Cure Violence evaluations noted that many sites operated under "severe funding constraints," with some lacking essential personnel like outreach workers, underscoring how budgetary shortfalls compromise the model's core requirements for sustained presence in high-risk areas.^[4] Political dynamics exacerbate these challenges, as funding decisions often reflect partisan or ideological shifts in resource allocation. Following the 2024 U.S. presidential election, the incoming Trump administration's DOJ implemented sweeping cuts to community violence prevention grants totaling around $169 million, targeting programs perceived as insufficiently enforcement-oriented in favor of traditional policing emphases.^[45] ^[53] In contrast, earlier Democratic-led initiatives, such as St. Louis's 2019 allocation of $4.6 million from city surplus funds to Cure Violence, demonstrated how progressive urban administrations may prioritize such interventions during periods of relative fiscal flexibility.^[54] This variability illustrates the model's vulnerability to electoral cycles and policy preferences, where conservative skepticism toward non-punitive approaches can lead to defunding, while liberal support may wane under broader budget austerity.^[45]

Empirical Evaluations

Studies Showing Reductions in Violence

An evaluation of the original CeaseFire program (precursor to Cure Violence) in Chicago, conducted by Northwestern University researchers using quasi-experimental methods comparing intervention sites to citywide trends, found statistically significant reductions in shootings in five of seven targeted police beats from 2004 to 2006, with declines ranging from 16% to 67% relative to non-intervention areas.^[13] Homicides also decreased in most sites, though attribution to the intervention was complicated by concurrent citywide drops in violence.^[13] In Baltimore's Safe Streets program, a quasi-experimental replication study using negative binomial regression on monthly gun violence data from 2003 to 2010 across four intervention neighborhoods and high-crime controls reported significant reductions in three sites: a 56% drop in homicides and 34% in nonfatal shootings in Cherry Hill (incident rate ratio [IRR] = 0.44 for homicides, p < 0.001; IRR = 0.66 for shootings, p < 0.001), a 53% homicide reduction in McElderry Park during peak implementation periods (IRR = 0.47, p < 0.001), and a 34% decrease in nonfatal shootings in Ellwood Park (IRR = 0.66, p < 0.001).^[55] The analysis estimated the program prevented at least 5 homicides and 35 nonfatal shootings over 112 months, though one site (Madison-Eastend) showed increased homicides.^[55] A synthetic control method analysis of seven Baltimore Safe Streets sites from 2007 to 2017 estimated homicide reductions in select areas, including 21% in Cherry Hill and up to 62% in McElderry Park over three years post-implementation, with placebo inference tests supporting the findings in some cases despite overall mixed results across sites.^[56] In New York City, a 2015 evaluation of Cure Violence sites in the South Bronx and East New York using time-series analysis of shooting victimizations found significant declines in the South Bronx site (p < 0.05), though no comparable drop in East New York, suggesting localized effectiveness tied to implementation fidelity.^[57] A more recent difference-in-differences analysis of multiple NYC sites reported an average 14% reduction in shootings relative to counterfactual trends, persisting over several years.^[58]

Studies and Analyses Questioning Effectiveness

A 2022 evaluation of Cure Violence in St. Louis by criminologist Richard Rosenfeld analyzed homicide and gun assault trends from 2018 to 2021 across intervention and comparison neighborhoods, finding no statistically significant reductions in targeted areas during the program's rollout; in fact, some intervention zones experienced increases comparable to or exceeding citywide trends, suggesting the program did not contribute to observed violence declines post-2020.^[2] ^[59] The full report described overall evidence as mixed, with qualitative data indicating limited community perception shifts despite interrupter outreach efforts, and quantitative metrics failing to isolate program effects amid broader pandemic-related disruptions.^[59] Studies in other cities have similarly reported inconsistent or null impacts. A 2023 analysis of Baltimore's Cure Violence sites showed reductions in gun violence in select neighborhoods but increases in at least one, while Philadelphia's CeaseFire (a precursor model) yielded significant shooting drops in some areas but not others, highlighting variability tied to implementation fidelity and unaddressed structural factors like economic disinvestment.^[60] These findings underscore a lack of uniform effectiveness, with no program-wide mechanism ensuring sustained norm changes against retaliation.^[60] A review by the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority examined multiple violence interrupter initiatives, including Cure Violence implementations, and concluded that standalone applications of the model achieve less consistent community-level violence reductions compared to integrated approaches combining interrupters with enforcement or social services; several evaluations lacked rigorous controls for external trends, such as seasonal fluctuations or policing shifts, potentially inflating perceived benefits.^[61] Critics, including Rosenfeld, argue that quasi-experimental designs common in Cure Violence assessments—often relying on pre-post comparisons without randomized assignment—fail to rule out regression to the mean or coincidental downturns, as evidenced by St. Louis where citywide homicide drops occurred independently of the program.^[2] Methodological gaps persist across evaluations, with few randomized controlled trials available; a 2024 preprint of an RCT in New York City reported average shooting reductions but acknowledged site-specific heterogeneity, reinforcing doubts about generalizability.^[15] In Trinidad and Tobago's 2015–2017 rollout, an independent assessment found short-term dips in some violence metrics but no long-term attribution to interrupters, attributing persistence to underlying gang dynamics unaltered by outreach.^[62] Such patterns suggest that while interrupter credibility may yield anecdotal de-escalations, aggregate data often fails to demonstrate causal reductions exceeding placebo or natural variance.

Methodological Critiques and Gaps

Evaluations of Cure Violence have predominantly relied on quasi-experimental designs, such as interrupted time series analyses and synthetic control methods, rather than randomized controlled trials (RCTs), limiting the ability to establish causality.^[4] For instance, a New York City evaluation acknowledged that program sites were selected based on high violence levels without randomization, introducing potential selection bias and regression to the mean effects where violence naturally declines post-intervention without program attribution.^[32] Similarly, no RCTs specific to Cure Violence were identified in systematic reviews, with most studies excluded from meta-analyses due to methodological flaws like inadequate controls or co-occurring interventions that confound results.^[4]^[63] Confounding factors further undermine attribution of violence reductions to the program, as implementations often coincide with changes in policing, economic conditions, or other community initiatives. A synthetic control evaluation in Baltimore found disparate site-specific effects, with some neighborhoods experiencing increased rather than decreased violence, highlighting how unmeasured local confounders—such as gang dynamics or enforcement variations—may drive outcomes more than the intervention itself.^[56] In St. Louis, an independent analysis reported no statistically significant declines in homicides or gun assaults across Cure Violence sites compared to synthetic controls, attributing this to potential displacement of violence or failure to interrupt transmission effectively amid broader crime trends.^[2] These findings underscore a common critique: reliance on aggregate crime data from police reports, which may suffer from underreporting inconsistencies or shifts in recording practices, rather than individual-level tracking of interrupter interactions.^[64] Research gaps persist in assessing long-term sustainability and unintended effects, with most studies focusing on short-term (1-3 year) post-implementation periods where initial enthusiasm may inflate apparent successes. Systematic reviews note that while some early evaluations reported reductions, subsequent analyses reveal challenges in maintaining fidelity and scaling, with mixed outcomes suggesting implementation variances rather than model robustness.^[4]^[65] Few studies disaggregate effects by subgroup (e.g., youth vs. adults) or examine potential harms, such as interrupters inadvertently escalating conflicts due to their backgrounds, leaving causal mechanisms—like norm change versus mere mediation—under-tested through first-principles experimentation. Additionally, cost-effectiveness claims, often based on averted incidents without rigorous counterfactuals, overlook opportunity costs relative to alternatives like focused deterrence.^[24] Overall, the evidence base calls for more rigorous, multi-site RCTs with pre-specified protocols to isolate Cure Violence's incremental impact beyond secular trends.^[15]

Expansion and Adaptations

Domestic Sites and Partnerships

Cure Violence implementations in the United States began in Chicago, Illinois, in 2000 as the CeaseFire program, targeting high-violence neighborhoods through community outreach workers.^[4] By 2024, the model had expanded to legacy sites including Chicago, New Orleans, Louisiana, and Minneapolis, Minnesota, alongside active partnerships in cities such as Kansas City, Missouri, and Wichita, Kansas.^[66] Additional domestic sites encompass Annapolis, Maryland; Atlanta, Georgia; Chester, Pennsylvania; Charlotte, North Carolina; Columbus, Georgia; Grand Rapids, Michigan; Louisville, Kentucky; and Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where local teams apply violence interruption strategies in designated hotspots.^[17] Partnerships typically involve collaborations between Cure Violence Global and local nonprofits, community organizations, and municipal agencies to adapt the public health approach to specific urban contexts.^[30] For example, in New York City, programs modeled on Cure Violence, such as Save Our Streets, partner with the Center for Justice Innovation, faith leaders, and resident groups to mediate conflicts in high-risk areas like Brownsville and East New York.^[67] Similarly, the Bronx Rises Against Gun Violence (BRAG) initiative coordinates with community-based organizations, residents, and public partners to detect and respond to retaliation risks.^[68] In Baltimore, Maryland—the first expansion beyond Illinois in 2007—Cure Violence Global provided direct leadership and training to local implementers, integrating with city efforts to address persistent shooting hotspots.^[4] Federal support has facilitated scaling, with Cure Violence Global receiving Office of Justice Programs grants in fiscal year 2024 to build capacity among intermediaries, enabling further domestic site development.^[69] These partnerships emphasize non-police interventions, often linking with hospital trauma centers for response programs that follow up on shooting victims to prevent cycles of retaliation.^[21] Oakland, California, and Washington, D.C., represent additional examples where local adaptations, such as D.C.'s Cure the Streets under the Attorney General's office, align with Cure Violence principles through targeted neighborhood deployments.^[70]^[71] Overall, as of 2024, Cure Violence operates across approximately 18 U.S. cities with 72 sites, relying on these alliances for site-specific training, data-driven targeting, and norm-change outreach.^[72]

International Implementations

The Cure Violence model has been implemented in multiple countries outside the United States, with a primary focus on Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as select sites in Africa, treating violence as a contagious disease through interrupters, norm-changing efforts, and community mobilization.^[17] As of recent reports, the approach operates in over 10 countries across more than 25 cities and 60 communities internationally, often in partnership with local organizations and supported by entities like the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and UNICEF.^[73] ^[74] Implementations emphasize adapting the core public health framework—detecting conflicts, interrupting transmission, and changing behaviors—to local contexts, such as gang-related violence in urban slums or gender-based violence in high-risk areas.^[1] In Trinidad and Tobago, Cure Violence partners with the RedThread Youth Foundation in Port of Spain's Laventille community, where an independent evaluation documented a 51% reduction in overall violence and a 95% decrease in group attacks following program rollout.^[17] A separate IDB-funded study confirmed a 45.1% drop in violent crime rates in treatment areas, alongside reductions in hospital admissions for gunshots (preventing an estimated 218 incidents) and self-reported victimization, though effects on fear of crime were small to moderate.^[75] ^[76] These outcomes were attributed to interrupter interventions and community trust-building, with cost-effectiveness estimated at $3,500–$4,500 per averted violent incident.^[77] Latin American adaptations include citywide programs in Colombia's Cali (covering 52 sites), targeted efforts in Honduras' Chamelecón, Chile's Santiago, and Mexico's Culiacán (six communities since 2020), focusing on homicide hotspots amid organized crime and social fragmentation.^[17] ^[78] An evidence report on Latin America and the Caribbean implementations found consistent reductions in fear of crime with small to medium effect sizes, alongside qualitative improvements in community support for education and employment, though quantitative violence metrics varied by site due to data limitations and confounding factors like policy changes.^[79] In South Africa, the CeaseFire program in Cape Town's Hanover Park deploys interrupters to mediate gang disputes, but independent evaluations remain limited, with anecdotal reports of de-escalated conflicts.^[80] A 2025 systematic review of 13 evaluations across 27 sites (including international ones) reported that 95.8% of non-U.S. implementations showed violence reductions, with 54.2% statistically significant, though methodological critiques highlight challenges in isolating program effects from broader trends or selection bias in high-risk areas.^[4] Expansions into the Middle East and North Africa are underway but lack site-specific outcome data as of 2025.^[81] Overall, international fidelity to the model correlates with stronger results in controlled evaluations, yet scalability depends on local capacity and sustained funding.^[82]

Derivative Programs

Operation SNUG, implemented across multiple sites in New York State since 2009, directly models the Cure Violence approach by deploying trained street outreach workers—often former offenders—as "credible messengers" to detect brewing conflicts, mediate disputes, and prevent retaliatory gun violence.^[83]^[84] The program treats gun violence as a contagious disease, emphasizing behavior change through one-on-one interventions and community norm shifts, with workers logging over 1,000 conflict interruptions annually in participating areas like Albany and Rochester as of 2013 evaluations.^[85] Advance Peace, established in Richmond, California, in 2012, adapts the model by incorporating data analytics to identify the top 50-100 active firearm offenders per year, pairing street-level interruption with a structured "Peacemaker Fellowship" offering cognitive behavioral therapy, case management, and stipends to deter participation in violence cycles.^[86]^[87] Unlike core Cure Violence sites, it mandates participation for fellows and tracks outcomes via hospital and police data, correlating with an 84% homicide drop in Richmond from 2007 peaks to 2017.^[88] The Rapid Employment and Development Initiative (READI) in Chicago, launched in 2020 by Heartland Alliance, derives interruption tactics from Cure Violence while integrating subsidized employment and cognitive behavioral therapy for high-risk men aged 18+, recruited via algorithmic risk scores and outreach in five high-violence neighborhoods.^[89]^[90] Participants receive 18 months of support, with interim randomized trial data showing a 50% reduction in shooting arrests compared to controls by 2022.^[91] Hospital-based violence intervention programs (HVIPs), such as those in Oakland and Baltimore since the early 2010s, extend the model into medical settings by training interrupters to counsel shooting victims at trauma centers, linking them to social services and follow-up mediation to curb retaliation, often in partnership with Cure Violence affiliates.^[92] These adaptations reported interrupting 20-30% of potential reprisal incidents in evaluated sites by 2021.^[31] A prison-specific adaptation, piloted in U.S. facilities from 2016, applies interrupter training to inmates at high violence risk, focusing on de-escalation within correctional environments to reduce assaults, though scaled evaluations remain limited.^[93]

Controversies and Criticisms

Hiring Ex-Offenders and Risk of Enabling Crime

Cure Violence's model relies on recruiting violence interrupters from communities with high violence rates, prioritizing individuals with prior involvement in gangs or criminal activity for their perceived street credibility and ability to mediate conflicts among at-risk groups.^[21] These workers, often ex-offenders, are tasked with detecting potential retaliatory incidents, de-escalating disputes, and connecting individuals to social services, under the assumption that their past experiences enable trust-building where law enforcement cannot.^[94] However, this hiring practice introduces risks, as ex-offenders generally exhibit elevated recidivism rates—U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics data indicate that approximately 68% of released prisoners are rearrested within three years, with higher rates for those with violent histories—potentially compromising program integrity and public safety. Documented cases illustrate these hazards in Cure Violence implementations. In Louisville, Kentucky, interrupter Dwight Taylor, employed by the local Cure Violence affiliate, was convicted in 2020 of strangling a woman and sentenced to 17 years in prison for the February 2019 assault, highlighting failures in ongoing monitoring of personnel with criminal backgrounds.^[95] Similarly, in St. Louis, Missouri, Jerome Williams, a Cure Violence violence interrupter, pleaded guilty on December 11, 2024, to evidence tampering in a murder-for-hire scheme; he had faced prior accusations in 2022 of destroying evidence in a homicide investigation while employed in the program.^[96]^[97] Such incidents raise concerns that insufficient vetting or supervision—exacerbated by the model's emphasis on independence from law enforcement—may allow workers to maintain or exploit criminal networks, inadvertently enabling rather than interrupting violence.^[21] Critics contend that employing high-risk individuals without robust recidivism screening or accountability mechanisms, such as mandatory background checks beyond initial hiring or real-time performance tracking, undermines the intervention's preventive aims and exposes communities to continued threats from program insiders.^[98] While proponents argue that reformed ex-offenders provide unique value, empirical evidence from these reoffenses suggests a need for enhanced risk assessment, as general studies on ex-offender employment show elevated misconduct probabilities in roles requiring community trust.^[99] In derivative programs like Washington, D.C.'s Cure the Streets, similar issues arose, with interrupter Cotey Wynn arrested in March 2025 for a 2023 shooting death, further evidencing patterns of criminal relapse among hired personnel.^[100]

Ideological and Causal Critiques

Critics contend that Cure Violence's conceptualization of violence as a contagious disease promotes an ideological framework that minimizes individual moral agency and accountability, framing deliberate criminal choices as involuntary transmissions akin to pathogens rather than volitional behaviors shaped by incentives, norms, and personal decisions.^[101] This public health analogy, while intended to destigmatize affected communities, is argued to erode deterrence by equating offenders with passive carriers, potentially fostering a culture of leniency that prioritizes redemption over consequences and undermines traditional emphases on justice and retribution.^[102] The program's reliance on hiring ex-offenders as interrupters exemplifies this, with detractors asserting it ideologically validates prior criminality and risks embedding unrepentant actors within communities under a therapeutic veneer, as evidenced by incidents where workers faced accusations of involvement in illegal activities.^[103] From a causal standpoint, the model's epidemic-control strategy presumes violence propagates primarily through interpersonal contagion interruptible by credible messengers, yet this mechanism lacks robust evidence of literal transmission and neglects entrenched drivers such as familial instability, economic disincentives to lawful conduct, and subcultures that normalize retaliation for perceived slights.^[2] Interventions may yield temporary de-escalations via mediation, but without addressing these foundational causes—where weak enforcement signals low costs for violence and absent social structures fail to instill self-control—reductions risk reversion, as interrupters cannot systematically alter the rational calculus favoring aggression in high-risk environments. Analyses revealing no homicide declines in targeted areas, such as St. Louis implementations from 2018 onward, underscore potential overreliance on unverified causal pathways, attributing any sporadic drops to extraneous factors like intensified policing rather than the program's core tactics.^[2] This highlights a gap in causal realism, where the metaphor prioritizes symptomatic containment over holistic remediation of perpetuating conditions.

Oversight and Accountability Issues

In Peoria, Illinois, Cure Violence implementation faced significant financial accountability lapses, prompting an investigation by the Peoria Police Department and State's Attorney into potential criminal improprieties as of September 2024.^[104] City officials allocated $650,000 from American Rescue Plan Act funds, but only $382,000 was disbursed amid discrepancies uncovered by a Minority Business Development audit.^[104] The Peoria City/County Health Department terminated its partnership with subcontractor House of Hope due to non-compliance with grant requirements and logistical failures over seven months, following an initial $25,000 payment for program assessment in July 2022.^[104] Local council member Zach Oyler attributed these issues to a "clear lack of oversight and accountability," noting the program's initial rejection two years prior for similar reasons.^[104] New York City's management of Cure Violence-inspired violence interrupter programs has been criticized for fragmented oversight, particularly after transferring administrative responsibility to the Department of Youth and Community Development (DYCD), which lacks specialized expertise in violence prevention.^[105] This shift contributed to inadequate strategic coordination, inconsistent monitoring of program fidelity, and insufficient evaluation of outcomes across sites.^[105] The New York City Comptroller's report highlighted how such structural gaps hinder effective resource allocation and performance tracking, exacerbating disparities in program implementation.^[105] Accountability challenges extend to staff monitoring, where violence interrupters have committed serious crimes despite their roles, revealing deficiencies in background checks, ongoing supervision, and disciplinary protocols. In St. Louis, a Cure Violence worker pleaded guilty in December 2024 to involvement in a 2022 murder-for-hire plot.^[96] Another St. Louis interrupter, Jerome Williams, faced charges in May 2022 for allegedly destroying evidence in a murder case while employed by the program.^[97] In Washington, D.C., Cotey Wynn, a Cure the Streets interrupter (modeled on Cure Violence), was charged with homicide in March 2025 related to a 2023 fatal shooting.^[100] These incidents, amid broader scrutiny of worker behavior, underscore oversight failures, as D.C.'s programs faced lawsuits and calls for reform by June 2025 due to inadequate vetting and response mechanisms.^[106] Similar patterns in Minneapolis involved accusations of fraud and mismanagement in violence intervention efforts, leading to funding cuts and heightened demands for transparency.^[7]

Reception and Broader Impact

Media Portrayals

The 2011 documentary The Interrupters, directed by Steve James and Alex Kotlowitz and broadcast on PBS Frontline, prominently featured violence interrupters affiliated with CeaseFire Chicago, the precursor organization to Cure Violence, depicting their efforts to mediate conflicts and prevent retaliatory shootings in high-violence neighborhoods.^[107] The film portrayed interrupters—often former gang members—as courageous figures placing themselves in harm's way, with scenes of direct interventions amid ongoing turf wars, earning acclaim for humanizing the public health approach to violence reduction but also highlighting the personal risks and moral ambiguities involved in employing ex-offenders.^[108] Critics praised its raw authenticity, though some noted its focus on individual heroics over systemic evaluation of program outcomes.^[109] Mainstream news outlets have generally presented Cure Violence favorably as an innovative, community-driven alternative to traditional policing, often emphasizing anecdotal success stories and endorsements from public health advocates. For instance, a 2020 Guardian opinion piece by Cure Violence founder Gary Slutkin framed the model as a compassionate epidemic-control strategy akin to responses to AIDS or tuberculosis, arguing for broader adoption amid rising urban violence.^[110] Local coverage, such as in New York City Comptroller reports, has highlighted reductions in shootings attributable to the program, portraying it as a cost-effective complement to law enforcement.^[105] However, such portrayals frequently rely on self-reported data from program affiliates, with limited scrutiny of independent verification. Critical media examinations have been rarer but pointed, questioning the program's empirical foundations and scalability. A 2022 TIME magazine analysis of Cure Violence's implementation in St. Louis raised doubts about its causal impact on violence rates, citing stalled homicide reductions post-launch and methodological flaws in prior evaluations, such as non-randomized comparisons that could confound results with concurrent policing changes.^[2] This coverage underscored a pattern in some reporting: enthusiastic promotion of interrupter narratives without rigorous disaggregation of violence trends, potentially overstating efficacy amid broader debates on attribution in social interventions. Recent local news, including a 2024 report on Jacksonville's discontinued Cure Violence initiative, echoed oversight concerns from an Office of Inspector General review, portraying administrative lapses as undermining public trust despite initial media hype.^[111] Overall, media emphasis on inspirational fieldwork has overshadowed evaluations revealing inconsistent results across sites, with source selection often favoring program proponents over skeptics of its disease metaphor.

Endorsements Versus Opposition

Cure Violence has garnered endorsements from several political figures and public health advocates who praise its public health framework for interrupting violence cycles. Former First Lady Laura Bush, following a 2005 visit to the Chicago program, described it as having "revolutionized the city's approach to eradicating youth violence."^[24] New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio committed $10 million in August 2020 to expand Cure Violence into additional neighborhoods, citing its potential to foster safer communities.^[112] Local governments, including the Grand Rapids City Commission, have voted to implement the model, viewing it as a community-driven alternative to supplement policing.^[113] The U.S. Department of Justice's National Gang Center has rated Cure Violence as effective for broad community gang violence prevention, based on evaluations showing reductions in shootings and homicides in targeted areas.^[3] Organizations like the New York City Comptroller's office have highlighted it in reports as an evidence-based strategy within community violence intervention efforts, recommending its integration with other tactics to address gun violence crises.^[105] Opposition has primarily come from proponents of enforcement-focused strategies, who argue that Cure Violence operates independently of law enforcement and risks undermining police authority by prioritizing mediation over deterrence.^[114] Criminologists such as Richard Rosenfeld have critiqued its effectiveness, citing a 2022 analysis in St. Louis where neighborhoods with the program showed no significant declines in homicides or gun assaults compared to controls, attributing this to implementation flaws and overreliance on interrupters without sufficient structural enforcement.^[2] Some law enforcement advocates and focused deterrence proponents position Cure Violence as ideologically opposed to punitive measures, warning it may enable ongoing criminal networks by hiring ex-offenders without rigorous oversight.^[115] These critiques often stem from empirical evaluations questioning causal links between the program and sustained violence reductions, particularly in contexts with inconsistent funding or high staff turnover.^[103]

References

[1]
Cure Violence Global - About Us
Cure Violence Global helps communities to implement violence prevention programs that are effective in significantly reducing violence. Founded by Gary Slutkin, ...
[2]
Analysis Raises Questions Over Cure Violence's Impact | TIME
Feb 23, 2022 · And across the board, Rosenfeld found that homicides and gun assaults did not decrease in the neighborhoods Cure Violence had rolled its program ...
[3]
Cure Violence | National Gang Center - Office of Justice Programs
Cure Violence program is a broad community approach to preventing and reducing gang violence. Undergirded by the public health model, the program approaches ...
[4]
A Systematic Review on the Effectiveness of the Cure Violence ...
Sep 9, 2025 · The Cure Violence approach applies public health epidemic control strategies to reduce violence in highly impacted communities and countries.
[5]
Do Cure Violence Programs Reduce Gun Violence? Evidence from ...
We find that, on average, Cure Violence is associated with a 14% reduction in shootings relative to the counterfactual. This association persists in the years ...
[6]
A group of 'violence interrupters' worked the streets of New Orleans ...
May 25, 2023 · Just last month, a former Cure Violence staffer pleaded guilty to federal drug charges and is facing a minimum ten-year sentence. Pep said that ...
[7]
Cities Are Undermining Promising Violence Intervention Programs
Sep 26, 2024 · Inconsistent funding and commitments, poor organization, and political pressure have hamstrung the work of community violence intervention groups across the US.<|control11|><|separator|>
[8]
CeaseFire: A Public Health Approach to Reduce Shootings and ...
Oct 28, 2009 · The program was launched in Chicago in 1999 by the Chicago Project for Violence Prevention at the University of Illinois at Chicago School of ...
[9]
Epidemiologist says treat violence like a disease - Rotary International
Known since 2012 as Cure Violence, it's based at the University of Illinois at Chicago, where Slutkin is a professor at the School of Public Health. The Cure ...Missing: founded | Show results with:founded
[10]
[PDF] CeaseFire Community Campaign for Violence Prevention
Created in 1995, CeaseFire is a data-driven public health approach to reduce shootings and killings in communi- ties where violence is at epidemic proportions.
[11]
[PDF] REPORT DIGEST - Illinois Auditor General
Oct 9, 2006 · The Chicago Project for Violence Prevention (Chicago Project) was formed in 1995 as a strategic public health initiative to support accelerated ...Missing: founded | Show results with:founded
[12]
[PDF] program audit funding provided by or through the state of illinois to ...
Aug 9, 2007 · The first CeaseFire zone was established in Chicago Police District 11 in June 2000. Based on CPD shooting statistics from 1999 – supplied ...Missing: founded | Show results with:founded
[13]
[PDF] Evaluation of CeaseFire-Chicago - Office of Justice Programs
Mar 20, 2008 · The report presents the findings of an evaluation of CeaseFire, a Chicago-based violence prevention program. The program is administered by ...
[14]
[PDF] Cure Violence Global Timeline
First Lady Laura Bush visits. Cure Violence sites in Chicago. Dr. Slutkin is guest at. State of the Union. 42% drop in shootings across 4 Chicago sites. KEY ...Missing: history | Show results with:history
[15]
Do Cure Violence Programs Reduce Gun Violence? Evidence from ...
Jun 4, 2024 · In 2012, the Cure approach was first adopted in the East New York and Crown Heights neighborhoods of Brooklyn, joining existing anti-gun ...<|separator|>
[16]
[PDF] Cure Violence Global Summary
May 28, 2024 · In its first year of implementation, CVG's model was associated with a 67% decrease in shootings in one of Chicago's most violent communities ...
[17]
Where We Work - Cure Violence Global
Cure Violence Cities ; Chile. Santiago ; Colombia. Cali (citywide program, 52 sites) ; Honduras. Chamelecon ; Mexico. Culiacan ; Trinidad and Tobago. Port of Spain.Global Overview · United States · Middle East/north Africa
[18]
Cure Violence model | County Health Rankings & Roadmaps
Sep 6, 2024 · The Cure Violence model, formerly Chicago CeaseFire, uses a public health approach to prevent violence. Cure Violence treats violence like a ...
[19]
VIOLENCE IS A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE - NCBI - NIH
The Cure Violence (previously known as CeaseFire Health) Method uses these same principles that are used to reverse infectious epidemics to prevent and reverse ...
[20]
Cure violence: a public health model to reduce gun violence - PubMed
Mar 18, 2015 · The Cure Violence model is a public health approach to gun violence reduction that seeks to change individual and community attitudes and norms ...Missing: foundation | Show results with:foundation
[21]
What We Do - Cure Violence Global
The Cure Violence Hospital Response Program partners with local hospital trauma centers to provide a comprehensive response whenever a gunshot, stabbing, or ...The Cure Violence Approach · + Hospital Response And... · + System Development
[22]
[PDF] Overview of the Cure Violence Model For more than 15 years, Cur
Apr 3, 2019 · For more than 15 years, Cure Violence has successfully worked to reduce violence in some of the most violent communities in the United ...Missing: milestones | Show results with:milestones
[23]
Cure Violence: A Public Health Model to Reduce Gun Violence
Mar 18, 2015 · The Cure Violence model is a public health approach to gun violence reduction that seeks to change individual and community attitudes and norms ...
[24]
[PDF] EVIDENCE - Cure Violence Global
The program sought to reduce violence (homicides, injuries, and shootings) caused by young people in the neighborhoods of Charco Azul and the settlements of ...
[25]
Local Strategies to Build Community Resilience and Safety - NCBI
The Cure Violence disease model has three major components. The first component aims to interrupt transmission to stop violent events before they happen, ...
[26]
Metaphorically or Not, Violence Is Not a Contagious Disease
So the parallel in public health should not be the contagious disease model ... We should all welcome programs like Cure Violence that undertake to alter ...<|separator|>
[27]
[PDF] THE 5 REQUIRED COMPONENTS OF CURE VIOLENCE
Cure Violence maintains that violence is a learned behavior and that it can be prevented using disease control methods. The Cure Violence Model has specificity: ...Missing: principles | Show results with:principles
[28]
Program Profile: Cure Violence (Chicago, Ill.) - CrimeSolutions.gov
Nov 21, 2011 · A violence prevention program that uses a public health approach, using trained street violence interrupters and outreach workers, public education campaigns,Missing: foundation | Show results with:foundation
[29]
Evidence-Based Practices: Cure Violence
Oct 4, 2019 · Detect and interrupt the transmission of violence; Change community norms; Change the behavior of the highest potential transmitters ...
[30]
[PDF] Cure Violence Brochure (pdf)
For nearly 20 years, Cure Violence has worked with local partners to success- fully reduce violence in some of the most violent communities in the United.
[31]
Community-Based Violence Interruption Programs Can Reduce Gun ...
Jul 14, 2022 · South Bronx's SOS program was based on Chicago's Cure Violence program, founded in 1999. Cure Violence's mission is to “reduce violence globally ...<|separator|>
[32]
Cure Violence Programs in NYC - Data Team - New York City Council
CeaseFire, now known as Cure Violence, defines violence as a public health issue and seeks to treat it like an infectious disease. Cure Violence takes an ...
[33]
Cure Violence Health Model - Economic Mobility Catalog
Aug 8, 2022 · Shifting social norms and conducting outreach: Outreach workers respond to shootings, organize community members, and spread anti-violence ...<|separator|>
[34]
Is Violence 'Senseless'? Not According to Science: Let's Make ...
To change group norms in the community, Cure Violence uses public education campaigns, community events, community responses to every shooting and act of ...
[35]
Community-Based Efforts to Reduce Violence: A Scoping Review on ...
Jul 28, 2025 · These staff members work to interrupt violence, connect individuals to resources, and change community norms. Cure Violence (CV) has been ...
[36]
[PDF] CURE VIOLENCE STAFF ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES
Interruption activities. ▫Identifying conflicts/highest risk. ▫Determining engagement strategies. ▫Determining strategic plan. • Risk Reduction activities.
[37]
Outreach Worker, BIVO Cure Violence Program - CAMBA, Inc.
Minimum Education/Experience Required: Bachelor's Degree (B.A.) and/or equivalent experience. Other Requirements: Equally at home conversing with gang ...
[38]
Cure Violence Jobs in New York (NOW HIRING) - ZipRecruiter
To thrive in a Cure Violence role, you need a background in community outreach, conflict mediation, and de-escalation, often supported by experience in public ...
[39]
Training and Technical Assistance - Cure Violence Global
Cure Violence Global has been providing training in violence prevention for more than 20 years. Our seasoned trainers are standing by to help your community!
[40]
[PDF] Credible Messengers: An Exploratory Analysis of What Makes Them ...
The Cure Violence model has an extensive and structured training program that is delivered by a core group of veteran National Cure Violence staff when a ...
[41]
[PDF] Cure Violence Program Manager Job Description
Work with local officials to get shooting and homicide data for the target area. • Review the monthly Key Indicator Program (KPI) report provided by Cure ...
[42]
[PDF] STRUCTURE OF THE CURE VIOLENCE APPROACH
Cure Violence Global helps guide communities to choose the structure that will work best. POSSIBLE ORGANIZATION CHARTS FOR CURE VIOLENCE SITES. Oversight Entity.Missing: supervision | Show results with:supervision
[43]
Cure Violence Global - Nonprofit Explorer - News Apps
Cure Violence Global. Chicago, IL; Tax-exempt since April 2019; EIN: 82 ... Notable Sources of Revenue, Percent of Total Revenue. Contributions, $1,591,263.
[44]
GRANT to CURE VIOLENCE GLOBAL | USAspending
The main goal of CVIPI is the prevention and reduction of violent crime in communities by supporting comprehensive, evidence-informed community violence ...
[45]
DOJ Funding Update: A Deeper Look at the Cuts
May 19, 2025 · The Administration made deep cuts to OJP's Community Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative, the primary source of federal funding for ...<|separator|>
[46]
[PDF] RFP: Violence Interruption Program Grant
Oct 6, 2023 · Build teams of violence interrupters and outreach workers to: - Detect potentially violent situations and use informal mediation, non-physical ...
[47]
Violence Prevention Groups Sound the Alarm Over Funding Cuts
Jul 31, 2025 · Chicago Survivors expected to receive $2 million in state funding, but the budget ... cure violence in the community.” The organization also ...
[48]
154918 - Cure Violence Global - Ford Foundation
Core support for building the evidence base and best practices for connecting gender based violence prevention strategies to community violence.
[49]
Violence Prevention Gets Big Boost from New Partnership
Oct 5, 2022 · Cure Violence Global and AAA-ICDR Foundation are partnering to develop the next generation of trainings violence prevention workers.
[50]
[PDF] This document has been archived - Homeland Security
Jun 1, 2023 · The proposed project, which aims to prevent violence from both far left and far right extremist populations, combines Cure Violence Global's ( ...
[51]
Several Philly-area programs lose Department of Justice funding
May 9, 2025 · US Department of Justice recently cut over $800 million in grants nationwide, including $1.5 million for the hoops league and anti-violence program here.Missing: budget challenges
[52]
What's going on with violence prevention funding in Ward One?
Jun 3, 2025 · In the Mayor's budget proposal, violence interruption programs in Ward 1 are cut in half, the Ward 1 Cure the Streets program is entirely cut.
[53]
Philly Violence Prevention Workers Devastated by Funding Cuts
May 1, 2025 · “This is not the time to cut funding for those programs. It's going to exacerbate violence because a lot of these community-based organizations ...
[54]
Cure Violence Money On Track For Mayor's Desk By Friday | STLPR
Oct 3, 2019 · It then puts $4.6 million of the city's $23 million surplus into that Cure Violence bucket. Finally, he wants to take the $2 million that's ...Missing: influences | Show results with:influences
[55]
Effects of Baltimore's Safe Streets Program on Gun Violence - NIH
Chicago's CeaseFire program is an evidence-based public health approach to preventing gun violence. Baltimore is one of many US cities attempting to ...
[56]
Using synthetic control methodology to estimate effects of a Cure ...
The results from this study emphasise careful implementation and continuous evaluation of violence prevention efforts. This research also points to a greater ...
[57]
[PDF] The Effects of Cure Violence in The South Bronx and East New York ...
In the South Bronx Cure Violence site, the analysis revealed significant declines in shooting victim- izations, while shootings in East New York did not drop.Missing: peer- | Show results with:peer-
[58]
[2406.02459] Do Cure Violence Programs Reduce Gun ... - arXiv
Jun 4, 2024 · We find that, on average, Cure Violence is associated with a 14% reduction in shootings relative to the counterfactual. This association ...Missing: peer- reviewed
[59]
(PDF) Cure Violence St. Louis Evaluation Final Report - ResearchGate
Apr 7, 2025 · The results of this evaluation show mixed evidence of the effectiveness of Cure Violence in St. ... Richard Rosenfeld · Ernesto Lopez · View.
[60]
Evaluating the impact of a street outreach intervention on participant ...
Nov 6, 2023 · A recent study of the CureViolence program in Baltimore, for example, found an association with a reduction in gun violence indicators in some ...
[61]
Violence Interrupters: A Review of the Literature
Studies have shown that Cure Violence programs typically coordinate community activities that are designed to strengthen communal bonds in a neighborhood and to ...Missing: peer- | Show results with:peer-
[62]
Evaluating Cure Violence in Trinidad and Tobago - IDB Publications
This report presents a comprehensive evaluation of the Cure Violence initiative implemented in Trinidad and Tobago from July 2015 to August 2017.Missing: studies | Show results with:studies
[63]
Street outreach conflict mediation programs for reducing violence
Mar 3, 2024 · Randomized controlled trial (RCT) ... Using synthetic control methodology to estimate effects of a cure violence intervention in Baltimore, ...
[64]
Short‐term evaluation of Cure Violence St. Louis: Challenges ...
Oct 17, 2024 · This article documents the results of a multiyear, mixed-methods, quasi-experimental study of the implementation and impact of Cure Violence in St. Louis, ...Missing: critiques | Show results with:critiques
[65]
[PDF] Implementing Youth Violence Reduction Strategies | Urban Institute
Research Gaps and Limitations ... Of the three original studies on Cure Violence, two found statistically significant positive results and one study found.
[66]
[PDF] The Cure Violence Approach in the United States
Cure Violence Global works with local partners to implement effective approaches for reducing violence. The Cure Violence approach has.
[67]
Save Our Streets (S.O.S.) - Center for Justice Innovation
S.O.S. aims to reduce gun violence by using violence interrupters to mediate conflicts, operating in Brooklyn and Bronx neighborhoods with local partners.<|control11|><|separator|>
[68]
Good Shepherd Services | B.R.A.G. Program
Good Shepherd Services' BRAG (Bronx Rises Against Gun Violence) program works with young people, local residents, community-based organizations, and the public.
[69]
Readout of OJP and White House Community Violence Intervention ...
Sep 30, 2024 · See below for a full list of FY 2024 ... Awards to Capacity Building Intermediaries. Grantee, State. Chicago CRED, IL. Cure Violence Global ...
[70]
Cure the Streets: OAG's Violence Interruption Program
Cure the Streets is a public safety program launched by OAG aimed at reducing gun violence. It operates in discrete high violence neighborhoods.
[71]
Wielding the Power of Data for Violence Reduction and Prevention
Since then, Cure Violence Global has expanded across the U.S. to cities like Baltimore, New York, New Orleans, Oakland, and Loiza, Puerto ...<|separator|>
[72]
[PDF] invest in the world you want to exist - Cure Violence Global
Dec 10, 2024 · 2024 Partners. 18 Cities. 72 Sites. CVG teamed up with multiple organizations to interrupt political violence in Portland, OR, and the Pacific ...Missing: list | Show results with:list
[73]
Cure Violence Global (CVG) - ACLED
CVG pioneered and developed a public health approach to stop the spread of violence in communities by detecting and interrupting conflicts, identifying and ...
[74]
Cure Violence rises to No. 10 spot on list of top global NGOs
Feb 9, 2018 · Cure Violence is ranked 10th in NGO Advisor's 2018 report of the Top 500 NGOs in the world, one of the definitive international rankings of ...Missing: local | Show results with:local
[75]
IDB study shows how Trinidad and Tobago can prevent crimes with ...
A recent new study shows how a program that uses a model to prevent the “transmission” of violence reduced violent crime by 45.1% in Trinidad and Tobago.
[76]
[PDF] Evaluating Cure Violence in Trinidad and Tobago
Cure Violence relies on a public health approach to violence prevention and reduction, including violence associated with firearms and gangs. Cure Violence ...
[77]
[PDF] Cure Violence Evidence Summary
The analysis showed that the Cure Violence approach saves cities millions of dollars for every killing prevented. Based on an analysis of 10 years (2006 to.
[78]
Our Impact - Cure Violence Global
Since 2020, Cure Violence Global has been working with local organizations and agencies to implement the approach in six communities in Culiacan.
[79]
[PDF] The Effectiveness of the Cure Violence Approach in Latin America ...
May 1, 2025 · The Cure Violence model is based on the World. Health Organization's approach to reversing the spread of infectious diseases such as AIDS,.
[80]
A public health approach to reducing violence within the CARICOM ...
For example, an adaptation of the Cure Violence program, which utilizes a community-based, public health approach to prevent the “transmission” of violent crime ...
[81]
Cure Violence - Devex
Cure Violence is currently focusing our efforts on three parts of the world: the United States, Latin America, and the Middle East/North Africa.
[82]
Qualitative Evidence on the Implementation of Cure Violence in ...
Our findings suggest that the implementation of Cure Violence in Trinidad and Tobago led to educational and employment support for community members and a ...
[83]
SNUG - Family Services
SNUG is an evidence-based street outreach program based on the Cure Violence Model in Chicago, which treats gun violence like a disease.
[84]
Gun Involved Violence Elimination (GIVE) Initiative - NY DCJS
The SNUG Street Outreach program uses a public health approach to address gun violence by identifying the source, interrupting the transmission, and treating ...
[85]
[PDF] SNUG Evaluation - Rochester Institute of Technology
• The ability to collect and report data on gun violence and program operations in a timely fashion and to evaluate performance and success;. • Maintenance ...
[86]
Why Advance Peace and the Peacemaker Fellowship?
May 1, 2017 · Advance Peace is a very practical approach to disrupting gun violence in American urban neighborhoods.
[87]
Urban safety, community healing & gun violence reduction
Jul 5, 2021 · Advance Peace is a program that aims to reduce urban gun violence using formerly incarcerated community members as street outreach mentors and violence ...
[88]
An end to urban gun violence? - UC Berkeley School of Public Health
Oct 7, 2025 · Boggan and Corburn hope that policymakers pay attention to their analysis of Richmond's remarkable turnabout in gun violence—and put the Advance ...
[89]
Rapid Employment and Development Initiative (READI) Chicago
READI prioritizes those most at risk of gun violence involvement, providing them with an 18-month subsidized, supported job and cognitive-behavioral programming ...
[90]
Program | Heartland Alliance
READI Chicago is an innovative response to gun violence in Chicago. The one-year program connects people most highly impacted by gun violence to cognitive ...
[91]
An Experimental Evaluation of READI Chicago - Final Paper
Both algorithmic and human referral methods identified men with strikingly high scope for gun violence reduction: for every 100 people in the control group, ...
[92]
Five Examples of Community Violence Intervention Programs That ...
Nov 12, 2021 · 1. Hospital-based violence interruption programs (HVIPs) · 2. Group Violence Intervention · 3. Violence Interrupters or Street Outreach · 4. Cure ...
[93]
[PDF] Cure Violence Model Adaptation for Reducing Prison Violence
A central characteristic of the Cure Violence model is the use of “credible messengers” as workers—individuals from the same communities who are trusted and ...
[94]
Cure Violence - The Interrupters - National Gang Center
For more information about Cure Violence, visit http://cureviolence.org/ . Articles related to Cure Violence: Breaking the Cycle of Violence in Chicago (Source: ...Missing: origins | Show results with:origins
[95]
Louisville violence 'interrupter' sentenced to 17 years for assault
Dwight Taylor had been found guilty of strangling a woman in February 2019. He had worked as a violence "interrupter" in the Cure Violence program.
[96]
Former St. Louis anti-violence worker admits role in murder-for-hire
Dec 11, 2024 · Jerome Williams, 52, pleaded guilty in federal court on Tuesday to a single count of evidence tampering. He will be sentenced in April.
[97]
Violence interrupter accused of destroying murder case evidence
May 2, 2022 · Jerome Williams, a 49-year-old St. Louis man who won national attention for his work with the city's Cure Violence Program, appeared in ...
[98]
What Role Can Ex-Convicts Play in Curbing Violence? - The Atlantic
Oct 31, 2014 · Baltimore's Safe Streets is one of a half-dozen operations across the country set up by Cure Violence ... What Role Can Ex-Convicts Play in ...
[99]
Should You Hire Someone with a Criminal Record? - Kellogg Insight
Feb 3, 2017 · The researchers found that in sales positions, people with criminal records were more likely to be fired for misconduct.Missing: Cure | Show results with:Cure
[100]
He was a D.C. violence interrupter. Now he's a homicide suspect.
Mar 24, 2025 · Cotey Wynn worked with the D.C. attorney general's Cure the Streets program. He was arrested in the 2023 shooting of a former Morgan State ...
[101]
Should Violence be Treated As a Disease? - Freethink
Apr 19, 2019 · Freethink: Some critics might say that treating violence as a disease is eroding responsibility because people don't choose to have a ...
[102]
Might There Be A Cure For Violence? | GBH - WGBH
Feb 24, 2017 · We tend to think of violence as a matter of personal responsibility, believing that violent people have some sort moral failing.
[103]
Public health: How Cure Violence interrupts shootings
Sep 25, 2019 · Why has the model been criticized? In some cities, Cure Violence has come under criticism for employing ex-gang members and there have been ...
[104]
Investigation into Cure Violence 'funding discrepancies' underway
Sep 10, 2024 · “Here we are two years later, and there's a clear lack of oversight, a clear lack of accountability, and a program that appears to be completely ...
[105]
The Cure for Crisis - New York City Comptroller
By 2019, shootings had dropped to 777 and homicides to 319, reflecting a dramatic reduction in gun violence. However, the COVID-19 pandemic reversed this trend.
[106]
D.C. Attorney General alleges violence intervention nonprofit ...
Jun 20, 2025 · D.C.'s violence intervention programs have been under increased scrutiny amid questions about oversight, effectiveness and the behavior of some ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[107]
The Interrupters | FRONTLINE | Official Site | Documentary Series
Feb 14, 2012 · The Interrupters presents unforgettable profiles in courage, as three former street criminals in Chicago place themselves in the line of fire to protect their ...
[108]
The Interrupters (2011) - IMDb
Rating 7.5/10 (3,658) The problem with gang violence in Chicago hasn't changed much (for better or worse) in decades. In that light, "The Interrupters" can't be considered timely, ...
[109]
[PDF] THE INTERRUPTERS - The Cinema Guild
THE INTERRUPTERS tells the moving and surprising story of three dedicated individuals who try to protect their Chicago communities from the violence they, ...
[110]
Why we need to treat violence like a contagious epidemic
Jan 13, 2020 · Violence is a contagious and epidemic health problem and those exposed to it deserve treatment, compassion and care, writes Gary Slutkin.
[111]
New report finds former Jacksonville crime prevention program Cure ...
Dec 13, 2024 · ... report on “Cure Violence” from the Office of Inspector General .
[112]
An Approach Whose Time Has Come - Cure Violence Global
Aug 20, 2020 · Cure Violence Global (CVG) is considered one of four solutions that could radically change how communities stay safe through community-based approaches.
[113]
Victories | Moms Demand Action
Grand Rapids City Commission voted in favor of bringing Cure Violence, a program that uses trained workers, both outreach staff and violence interrupters ...
[114]
[PDF] A Public Health Model to Reduce Gun Violence
Jan 7, 2015 · Cure Violence operates independently of, while hopefully not undermining, law enforce- ment. In this article, we describe the theoretical basis ...
[115]
No Program Is a Panacea: The Fate of Focused Deterrence - Vital City
Mar 2, 2022 · One problem for focused deterrence is that it has long been viewed in opposition to Cure Violence, a violence reduction strategy that emphasizes ...