Cure Violence Studies by City

United States & Canada

Albany, NY

STUDIES

 

Annapolis, MD

STUDIES

 

Baltimore, MD

STUDIES

 

STREAKS

  • Costells, Darcy. “Three Baltimore Safe Streets Sites sites reach one year without a homicide: ‘I can go outside.’ Baltimore Sun. 2024.
  • Simms, Barry. “Safe Streets celebrates over a year of no homicides in Pann-North.” WBAL. 2024.
  • Johnson, Fawn. “What role can ex-convicts play in curbing violence?” The Atlantic. 2014.
  • Dingle, Stephon. “Baltimore community hits major milestone in reducing gun violence, 400 days without a homicide.” CBS News. 2024.

 

MEDIA

  • Zaleski, Andrew. “Can these former felons save Freddie Gray’s violent neighborhood.” Washington Post. (2016).
  • Rodericks, Dan. “Baltimore needs to expand Safe Streets.” Baltimore Sun. 2017.
  • MacGillis, Alex. “When law enforcement alone can’t stop the violence.” The New Yorker. 2023.
  • Baltimore City. “Safe Streets Brroklyn Achieves Over 365 Days with No Homicides.” Baltimore City (Press Release). 2024.

 

Charlotte, NC

STUDIES

 

MEDIA

  • Pitkin, Ryan. “A Talk with the Violence Interrupters of Beatties Ford Road.” Queen CIty Nerve. 2022.

Chicago, IL

STUDIES

  • Skogan WG, Hartnett SM, Bump N, Dubois J. Evaluation of CeaseFire-Chicago. Chicago, IL: Northwestern University; 2008
  • Ransford, C., Kane, C., Metzger, T., Quintana, E. & Slutkin, G. (2010). 4. An Examination of the Role of CeaseFire, the Chicago Police, Project Safe Neighborhoods, and Displacement in the Reduction in Homicide in Chicago in 2004. In R. Chaskin (Ed.), Youth Gangs and Community Intervention: Research, Practice, and Evidence (pp. 76-108). New York Chichester, West Sussex: Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/chas14684-005
  • Henry DB, Knoblauch S, Sigurvinsdottir R. The effect of intensive CeaseFire intervention on crime in four Chicago police beats: quantitative assessment. Chicago, IL: Robert R. McCormick Foundation; 2014.
  • University of Chicago. 7-11 Hit: Evaluation of Impact on Shootings. 2016. Unpublished findings.
  • Tran T. CeaseFire Final Report: An Evaluation of Gun and Non-Gun Violence in 47 Chicago Police Beats (1999–2009). Unpublished report; 2012. Accessed May 14, 2025. https://cvg.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/2012-CeaseFire-Final-Report_Thuy-Tran.pdf

 

MEDIA

  • Page, Clarence. “A cure for urban violence right under our noses.” Chicago Tribune (2018).
  • Gonzales, Ana Lucia. “Crossing Divides: Where shootings have become ‘normal’ for teens.” Washington Post. (2018).
  • Friedlander, Jamie. “In the line of fire.” Success. (2017).
  • Rosenberg, Tina. “Fighting street gun violence as if it were a contagion.” New York Times. (2018).
  • Rosenberg, Tina. “Want to quit the gang life? Try this job on.” New York Times. (2018).
  • O’Shea, James. “Get behind CeaseFire to reduce Chicago violence.” Chicago Sun Times. (2016).
  • Shackle, Samira. “Should we treat crime as something to be cured rather than punished?” The Guardian. (2018).
  • Kotlowitz, Alex. “Blocking the transmission of violence.” New York Times. 2008.
  • Chicago Sun-Times Editorial. “A worthy investment to stop the shooting.” Chicago Sun-Times. 2004.
  • Chicago Tribune Editorial. “Negotiating a cease-fire.” Chicago Tribune. 2002.
  • Pompilio, Nancy. “Chicago program treats violence as health issue: CeaseFire helped slayings fall 25 percent.” The Philadelphia Inquirer. 2005.
  • Main, Frank. “Treating gun crime like disease shows results: CeaseFire program may cut shootings by as much as 67%.” Chicago Sun-Times. 2002.
  • Huppke, Rex. “Chip and Lil’ Tony.” Chicago Tribune. 2004. Available at: https://www.chicagotribune.com/2004/12/10/chip-and-lil-tony-2/
  • Whitworth, Damian. “Street violence is an infection. I can cure it.” London Times. 2008. Available at: https://www.thetimes.com/best-law-firms/profile-legal/article/street-violence-is-an-infection-i-can-cure-it-j7g0gxttj76

Durham, NC

MEDIA

  • Inge, Leoneda. “Bull City United fights crime in Durham like it’s a treatable disease.” WUNC. (2018).

Halifax, NS (Canada)

  • Ungar M, Brisson J. Ceasefire annual evaluation report. Halifax, NS: Resilience Research Centre; 2016. Unpublished report.

 

Grand Rapids, MI

MEDIA

  • LaFurgey, Joe. “‘Violence Interrupters’ see early signs of success in Grand Rapids. WOOD. 2023.

Kansas City, MO

STUDIES

  • Watson-Thompson J, Harsin J, Stewart D, Everett M, Esiaka C. Aim4Peace Evaluation Brief Report, 2018–2020. The University of Kansas, Center for Community Health and Development; 2022.
  • Watson-Thompson J, Jones M, Taylor E. Aim4Peace 2013 Annual Evaluation Report. University of Kansas Work Group for Community Health and Development; 2014. Accessed May 14, 2025. https://cvg.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/2013-Aim4Peace-Annual-Evaluation-Report-Final.pdf
  • Colvin J, Watson-Thompson JJ, Dailey T, Schober D. Aim4Peace Annual Evaluation. 2009.
  • Colvin J, Watson-Thompson JJ, Dailey T, Schober D. Aim4Peace Annual Evaluation. 2008.

 

REPORTS (and Other Papers)

  • Jacobson, Joy. “A cure for gun violence.” AJN The American Journal of Nursing 115, no. 4 (2015): 19-20.

 

Macon, GA

MEDIA

  • Stephens, Carlos. “Pleasant Hill marks a year without murder.” WGXA. 2024.

 

Maywood, IL

MEDIA

  • Gregory T, J Ruzich. “Murder-free Maywood marks an awkward anniversary. Chicago Tribune. 2010.
  • Chicago Tribune. “CeaseFire returns to grateful Maywood.” Chicago Tribune. 2009. Available at: https://www.chicagotribune.com/2009/01/29/ceasefire-returns-to-grateful-maywood/

 

New Orleans, LA

STUDIES

  • City of New Orleans. NOLA FOR LIFE: 2016 Four-Year Progress Report. City of New Orleans; 2016. Accessed May 13, 2025. https://cvg.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/NOLAFORLIFE_ProgressReport_2016_LONG_070816-web-1.pdf

 

MEDIA

  • Vargas, Ramon Antonio. “2018 vioelent crime in New Orleans plummets to levels not seen since the 1970s.” The Advocate. 2018.

New York City, NY

STUDIES

  • Richardson, Joseph, Alicia Levers, Daniel Levine, Robert Callahan, et al. 2025. The Cure for Crisis: The Power and Potential of Community Violence Intervention. New York: Office of the New York City Comptroller. https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/the-cure-for-crisis/
  • Avram, Robert, Eva J. Koepcke, Ahmad Moussawi, and Manuel Nuñez. “Do Cure Violence Programs Reduce Gun Violence? Evidence from New York City.” arXiv (preprint), posted online 2024. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2406.02459.
  • Delgado, Sheyla A., Lama Alsabahi, Kevin T. Wolff, Nicole Alexander, Patricia Cobar, and Jeffrey A. Butts. The Effects of Cure Violence in the South Bronx and East New York, Brooklyn. In Denormalizing Violence: A Series of Reports from the John Jay College Evaluation of Cure Violence Programs in New York City. New York: Research and Evaluation Center, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, 2017.
  • Butts, Jeffrey A., Kevin T. Wolff, Evan Misshula, and Sheyla Delgado. Effectiveness of the Cure Violence Model in New York City. Research Brief 2015-01. New York: John Jay College of Criminal Justice, Research & Evaluation Center, 2015.
  • Berman, Greg, and M. Gold. From Chicago to Brooklyn: A Case Study in Program Replication. New York: Center for Court Innovation, 2011.
  • Klofas, John; Janelle Duda; Christopher J. Schreck; and O. Nicholas Robertson. SNUG Evaluation. Rochester, NY: Center for Public Safety Initiatives, Rochester Institute of Technology, July 2013. https://www.rit.edu/liberalarts/sites/rit.edu.liberalarts/files/documents/our-work/2013-10.pdf
  • Picard-Fritsche, Sarah, and Lenore Cerniglia. Testing a Public Health Approach to Gun Violence: An Evaluation of Crown Heights Save Our Streets, a Replication of the Cure Violence Model. New York: Center for Court Innovation, 2012. https://www.innovatingjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/SOS_Evaluation.pdf

 

MEDIA

  • Dwyer, Jim. “Six blocks, 96 buildings, zero shootings: New recipe at the Queensbridge Houses.” NY Times 19 (2017).
  • Khurshid, Samar. “Why does crime keep falling in New York City? Gotham Gazette. 2018.

 

Niagra Falls, NY

STUDIES

 

Philadelphia, PA

STUDIES

  • Roman C, Klein H, Wolff KT, Bellamy MD, Reeves K. Philadelphia CeaseFire: Findings From the Impact Evaluation. Temple University; 2017.

 

Rochester, NY

STUDIES

  • Surtel MN. Evaluating the impact of Gun Involved Violence Elimination (GIVE) Initiative within the City of Rochester. 2020. Accessed May 5, 2025.

 

St. Louis, MO

STUDIES

  • Lentz TS, Vogel M, Mathias B, Early A, Rey K, Ibitayo T, Davis MH. Short-term evaluation of Cure Violence St. Louis: Challenges, triumphs, and lessons learned. Criminol Public Policy. 2024;23(4):981-1017. doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12687
  • Results for America. Cure Violence: St. Louis, MO. Published 2023. Accessed May 14, 2025. https://catalog.results4america.org/case-studies/cure-violence-st-louis-mo.

 

Winston Salem, NC

STUDIES

 

Yonkers, NY

 

Latin America

Colombia (Cali)

STUDIES

  • León CEM, Muñoz MII, Benavides JCG. Informe Final de la Evaluación de Impacto del Programa Abriendo Caminos de la Fundación Alvaralice. 2020.

 

Honduras (San Pedro Sula)

STUDIES

  • Ransford C, Decker RB, Cruz GM, Sánchez F, Slutkin G. El modelo Cure Violence: reducción de la violencia en San Pedro Sula (Honduras)/The Cure Violence model: violence reduction in San Pedro Sula (Honduras). Rev CIDOB Afers Int. 2017;(117):179-204. https://doi.org/10.24241/rcai.2017.116.2.179

 

Mexico (Culiacan)

STUDIES

  • Más Vida. Informe Anual 2022. Culiacán, Mexico: Más Vida; 2022.

 

Mexico (Juarez)

STUDIES

 

Trinidad & Tobago (Port of Spain)

STUDIES

 

Africa, Asia, Europe

Iraq (Basra)

STUDIES

  • American Islamic Congress. Ambassadors for Peace – Iraq: Final Report (December 10, 2010 – December 31, 2013). American Islamic Congress; 2013.

 

Iraq (Sadr City)

STUDIES

  • American Islamic Congress. Ambassadors for Peace – Iraq: Final Report (December 10, 2010 – December 31, 2013). American Islamic Congress; 2013.

 

South Africa (Cape Town)

STUDIES

  • First Community Resource Centre. CeaseFire – Hanover Park, Second Six Months 2014.
  • First Community Resource Centre. CeaseFire – Hanover Park, First Six Months 2013.

 

MEDIA

  • Newman, M Sophia. “The secret life of a violence interrupter.” Narratively. 2015. Available at: http://narrative.ly/guns-ammo/secret-life-violence-interrupter/

Syria

  • Cure Violence Global. Final Report: NewSHAPE – New Strategies for Health and Peace in Syria. Submitted to: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. October 19, 2019. Unpublished report.

 

Political Violence (CV Adaptation)

  • Nakade, Ryan, and Jack GR Wippell. “Building Trust and Preventing Violence in Ideologically Polarized Communities: Lessons from Two Years of Practice.” Peace Review 37, no. 1 (2025): 1-12.

Gender-based Violence (CV Adaptation)

  • United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). Reducing violence and preventing femicides in Honduran communities. UNICEF Honduras. Published August 15, 2024. Accessed September 4, 2025. https://www.unicef.org/honduras/historias/reducing-violence-and-preventing-femicides-honduran-communities
  • Spotlight Initiative. Trained violence interrupters avert femicide in Honduras. In: Stories of Courage and Change from Latin America and Africa. UNICEF. October 18, 2021. Accessed September 4, 2025. https://www.spotlightinitiative.org/news/trained-violence-interrupters-avert-femicide-honduras

Studies with evidence of NORM CHANGE

  • Delgado, Sheyla A., Laila Alsabahi, and Jeffrey A. Butts. 2017. Young Men in Neighborhoods with Cure Violence Programs Adopt Attitudes Less Supportive of Violence. John Jay College Research & Evaluation Center (DataBits 2017-01), March 16, 2017. Accessed August 12, 2025. https://johnjayrec.nyc/2017/03/16/databit201701/.
    • “Young men living in neighborhoods with Cure Violence programs reported significant reductions in their willingness to use violence compared with men in similar areas without programs. Regression analysis explained 20 percent of the total variance in violence-related norms with significant reductions in willingness to use violence among young men in Cure Violence areas (–14%) and no significant change among residents in matched comparison neighborhoods.”
  • Butts, Jeffrey A., and Sheyla A. Delgado. 2017. Repairing Trust: Young Men in Neighborhoods with Cure Violence Programs Report Growing Confidence in Police. Research Brief 2017-01, Fall. John Jay College Research & Evaluation Center, City University of New York. Accessed August 12, 2025. https://academicworks.cuny.edu/jj_pubs/418/.
    • 22% increase in confidence in police, 22% increase in willingness to call the police
  • Webster, Daniel W., Jennifer M. Whitehill, Jon S. Vernick, and Elizabeth M. Parker. Evaluation of Baltimore’s Safe Streets Program: Effects on Attitudes, Participants’ Experiences, and Gun Violence. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Center for the Prevention of Youth Violence, 2012. https://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/center-for-prevention-of-youth-violence/publications/Evaluation_of_Baltimore’s_Safe_Streets_Program.pdf.
    • “The findings from the community survey of youth suggest that Baltimore’s Safe Streets program may have contributed to a reduction in tolerance for gun violence among youth in McElderry Park.”
    • “For survey Waves 1 and 2, youth in McElderry Park were much less likely than youth in the other neighborhoods to believe that it was okay to use a gun to resolve disputes in our scenarios. In fact, youth in McElderry Park were 4 times more likely to have the lowest level of support (“little or no”) for using violence than were youth in Union Square.”
  • Milam, Adam J., Shani A. Buggs, C. Debra M. Furr-Holden, Philip J. Leaf, Catherine P. Bradshaw, and Daniel Webster. 2016. “Changes in Attitudes toward Guns and Shootings following Implementation of the Baltimore Safe Streets Intervention.” Journal of Urban Health 93, no. 4 (August): 609–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-016-0060-y
    • “There was a statistically significantly improvement in 43% of the attitudes assessed in the intervention community post-intervention compared to 13 % of the attitudes in the control community. There was a statistically significant improvement in the violent attitudes toward personal conflict resolution scale after implementation of the intervention in both the intervention (b = −0.522, p G 0.001) and control community (b = −0.204, p G 0.032). Exposure to the intervention (e.g., seeing stop shooting signs in your neighborhood) was also associated with the nonviolent attitudes toward conflict scale. Overall, the study found greater improvement in attitudes toward violence in the intervention community following the implementation of the Safe Streets program.”
    • “There was a decline in the violent attitudes toward personal conflict factor after the implementation of the intervention in the intervention community (b = −0.522, p G 0.001). There was also an inverse relationship between seeing stop shooting signs and violent attitudes toward personal conflict resolution (b = −0.203, p = 0.039), such that the participants who reported seeing stop shooting signs were less likely to endorse violent attitudes to resolving personal conflict. There was a positive and significant relationship between personal interaction with Safe Streets workers and the violent attitudes toward personal conflict resolution factor (b = 0.371, p G 0.001). Young adults who reported seeing stop shooting signs in their neighborhood weremore likely to endorse nonviolent attitudes to resolving conflict (b = 0.276, p = 0.001).”
  • Picard-Fritsche, Sarah, and Lenore Cerniglia. Testing a Public Health Approach to Gun Violence: An Evaluation of Crown Heights Save Our Streets, a Replication of the Cure Violence Model. New York: Center for Court Innovation, 2012. https://www.innovatingjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/SOS_Evaluation.pdf
    • “Resident Exposure to the Community Mobilization Campaign: Results from the community survey suggested that a high percentage of the community was exposed to the mobilization campaign. Specifically, at Wave I, only 27% of respondents were aware of a violence prevention campaign in the neighborhood, compared with 73% of survey respondents at Wave II.”
    • “Perceptions of Campaign Effectiveness: Survey results suggested that exposure to SOS increased residents’ confidence in the potential of a mobilization campaign to decrease gun violence in the community. Specifically, only 29% of Wave I respondents felt that a campaign such as SOS would be “very likely” to reduce gun violence as compared with 55% of respondents in Wave II. Respondents who personally participated in one or more community events or targeted shooting responses were significantly more likely than others to believe in the efficacy of the community mobilization campaign.”

 

 

CVG Hospital

  • Thomas, Yalaunda M., Sheila C. Regan, Elena Quintana, Elise Wisnieski, Steven L. Salzman, Kevin L. Chow, Charles F. Mack, LeVon Stone, Barbara Giloth, and Eduardo Smith-Singares. 2022. “Violence Prevention Programs Are Effective When Initiated during the Initial Workup of Patients in an Urban Level I Trauma Center.” American Journal of Men’s Health 16 (5): article number 15579883221125007. https://doi.org/10.1177/15579883221125007
    • “Six percent (n = 18) of subjects in the treatment group and 11% (n = 33) in the control group returned with a new injury, yielding a total reinjury rate of 8.5%. Most patients returned only once with another violent injury. Individuals who did not receive CureViolence services were nearly twice as likely (odds ratio = 1.94; 95% confidence interval = 1.065, 3.522) to return with a violent reinjury.”
  • Bollman, E., A. Hammack, A. De Wulf, and J. Avegno. 2018. “369 Recidivism Among Young Gunshot Victims: Analysis of Outcomes from CeaseFire New Orleans.” Annals of Emergency Medicine 72, no. 4 (October): S145. https://www.annemergmed.com/article/S0196-0644(18)31110-7/fulltext
    • “Recidivism rates among the 3 groups were roughly similar in the time period studied. Further analysis revealed that the CeaseFire participant group trended towards higher rates of GSWs suffered before the study index visit when compared to other groups, but their post-CeaseFire enrollment recidivism rates decreased to the overall group mean. Furthermore, participants had a mean 805 days (67 months) until a recidivism event if it occurred, compared with 682 days for those who declined the intervention and 693 days for those not offered the intervention (both 57 months).”