Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2025 Jan-Dec:62:469580251361742.
doi: 10.1177/00469580251361742. Epub 2025 Aug 8.

Evaluating Community Violence Intervention Programs: A Scoping Review Synthesizing Methods and Measures

Meron Girma  1 , Julia Schleimer  1 , Astrid Aveledo  2 , Ayah Mustafa  1 , Camerin Rencken  1 , Carolyn Thurston  3 , Deepika Nehra  1 , Kris Torset  2 , Kristian Jones  1 , Laura Johnson  1 , Lauren Polansky  4 , Olivia McCollum  1 , Orlando Ames  5 , Rachel Ross  1 , Sam Decker  3 , Stephanie Taylor  6 , Tarrell Harrison  1 , Vivian Lyons  1 , Zaheed Lynch  5 , Ali Rowhani-Rahbar  1
Affiliations
Review

Evaluating Community Violence Intervention Programs: A Scoping Review Synthesizing Methods and Measures

Meron Girma et al. Inquiry. 2025 Jan-Dec.

Abstract

Community violence intervention (CVI) is a promising strategy to reduce community violence, but research on CVI programs remains underdeveloped. While prior reviews have examined the effectiveness of certain CVI models, we lack a comprehensive synthesis of how CVI research is done and what measures are used. We conducted a scoping review of CVI evaluation measures and methods in the United States, reviewing both peer-reviewed and gray literature from 1996 through 2023. We summarized characteristics of CVI program evaluations, including evaluation measures used, units of analysis, and involvement of external partners-including community members-in the evaluation. Of 1763 articles screened, 149 were included. A plurality of studies examined both outcome and process measures (38.9%), and use of process measures increased over time. Most outcome evaluations used only deficit-based measures (76.4%), with variation across CVI model/approach. Authors of studies included in this review reported that CVI practitioners contributed to evaluations in various ways, but only 10.7% of evaluations included CVI practitioners as authors. Process measures were most often collected at the individual level (84.2%), while outcome measures were collected relatively equally at the individual (56.6%) and community level (53.8%) though with notable variation across CVI models/approaches. Community partners working in CVI were part of our authorship team and offered critical insights into interpreting the findings from this scoping review. Findings underscore the need for a more comprehensive approach to CVI evaluation. By including process and outcome measures, including community-level units of analysis in addition to the typical individual-level ones, employing asset-based frameworks, and actively involving community voices, future research can more effectively assess the implementation and impacts of CVI programs.

Keywords: community violence; community violence intervention; community-based participatory research; firearms; scoping review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Study Flow Chart.
Two types of studies exist with regards to process or outcome measures: process only and outcome only.
Figure 2.
Number of studies examining process and/or outcome measures, by publication year.
"A line graph shows study counts from 1996 to 2022, classified as Asset only (green), Both (red), or Deficit only (blue). Overall, studies increased over time, peaking around 2022, with both and deficit-focused studies leading."
Figure 3.
Number of studies examining asset and/or deficit outcome measures, by publication year.
Year-by-year, from 1996 to 2022, the number and number of studies with community involvement by CVI practitioners.
Figure 4.
Number of studies that reported involvement of community membersa in evaluation, by publication year. aDefined as involvement of CVI practitioners, participants of CVI programs, other community members, or use of community advisory board/group.
A line chart shows number of studies on community only measures, both measures and individual only measures over time.
Figure 5.
Number of studies examining individual and community-level measures, by publication year. (A) Process measures. (B) Outcome measures.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. WISQARS Fatal and Nonfatal Injury Reports. 2023. Accessed July 8, 2024. https://wisqars.cdc.gov/reports/
    1. The National Child Traumatic Stress Network. Community Violence. December 8, 2017. Accessed August 28, 2024. https://www.nctsn.org/what-is-child-trauma/trauma-types/community-violence
    1. Sharkey P. The Long Reach of violence: A broader perspective on data, theory, and evidence on the prevalence and consequences of exposure to violence. Annu Rev Criminol. 2018;1(1):85-102. doi: 10.1146/annurev-criminol-032317-092316 - DOI
    1. Buggs SAL, Lund JJ, Kravitz-Wirtz N. Voicing narratives of structural violence in interpersonal firearm violence research and prevention in the United States. Front Public Health. 2023;11:1143278. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1143278. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Galtung J. Violence, peace, and peace research. J Peace Res. 1969;6(3):167-191.

LinkOut - more resources