DOJ Grant Cancellations Might Exacerbate Gun Violence

Community-based Violence Intervention Programs are Being Gutted

President Trump doubled down on his “law and order” platform during his 2024 re-election bid. Violent crime in urban areas is a consistent talking point. He issued an executive order just last week in which he pledges to “strengthen and unleash America’s law enforcement” to combat crime and criminals.

Fortunately for Trump and the country, violent crime, specifically homicide, has been trending in the right direction. After spikes in 2020-2022, violent crime and homicide rates have been decreasing since 2023. We are still experiencing reductions in early 2025 based on preliminary evidence from Jeff Asher and his team’s Real-Time Crime Index.

However, I fear that such trends may be redirected due to a number of decisions currently being made by President Trump’s administration, particularly his Department of Justice (DOJ).

The current DOJ is cutting funding from vital programs that serve to reduce crime and violence. Reuters reported that at least 365 grants from the Office of Justice Programs have been cut. Many of the cuts have been to community-based violence intervention programs (VIPs).

While they differ in structure, delivery, logistics and funding sources, VIPs generally take the form of community outreach and direct mediation of neighborhood conflicts by trained “credible messengers.” That is, individuals once involved in gangs, drugs, and street life – perhaps formerly incarcerated themselves – who can relate to mostly young, minority men in some of the most economically disadvantaged as well as racially and residentially segregated neighborhoods across the country. They are better known to the neighborhood and more trusted by residents than police (due to historical and contemporary over- and under-enforcement of the law).

VIPs, if provided with adequate resources and organizational support, have the potential to capitalize on a few related aspects. Gun violence is highly concentrated in a small number of places and among a small group of individuals embedded within certain social networks: gangs, drugs, crime. Also consider how many shootings are retaliatory in nature or based on arguments and petty beefs.

These men, especially those aged 18-34 in these neighborhoods among certain social networks are the most at-risk of being both the offenders and victims of violent crime. It’s the classic victim-offender overlap. They possess more legal cynicism and are less likely to talk to and cooperate with law enforcement. VIPs and their credible messengers have a better opportunity of getting through to them.

Take a look at the rates of being shot among different demographic groups in New Jersey for years 2019-2021 in population-years:

Black males, aged 18-34 were shot at a rate of 435.3 per 100,000 in population years.

I’m a blue belt in VIPs and much of what I know comes from reading the work of people like Andy Papachristos, Daniel Webster, Caterina Roman, among others. Most VIPs are based on one of two models: “Cure Violence” in Chicago and “Advance Peace” in Oakland. There is promising evidence of success, albeit some mixed evaluations, in reducing gun violence and addressing social norms around the acceptance of violence. Evaluations have found VIPs to be associated with declines in shootings in cities like Chicago, New York City, and Philadelphia. But it is important to keep in mind that they do more than just try to prevent retaliatory shootings. See here for an in-depth overview of their various functions in the community.

There are a number of VIPs in my home state of New Jersey. Some cities have more than one VIP. In Camden, for example, a city that I’ve been researching for years, Cure4Camden was officially launched in 2014 – about 1 year into the creation of the new Camden County Police Department (CCPD). Cure4Camden falls under the auspices of the city’s Center for Family Services. Although it wasn’t formally evaluated, I’d be willing to bet money that Cure4Camden has contributed to the historic reductions in homicides and gun violence since the city’s peak in 2011-2012. It’s not just the work of CCPD, and you can soon read about it in my forthcoming book in September.

It was announced last week that Cure4Camden’s street outreach team lost funding for two federal grants that totaled just under $3 million. It will no longer operate due to the funding cuts by the Trump administration. Newark’s VIP, the Newark Community Street Team, also lost funding for two federal grants that totaled $3 million.

Camden City and County representatives are not happy – justifiably and understandably so. They have protested and appealed the DOJ grant cuts. According to Camden Mayor Carstarphen:

“This city has come such a long way in terms of public safety and reducing violence because of programs like Cure4Camden combined with the community policing model. Comparing the rates of violent and overall crime to where we were just 10 years ago, this city is almost unrecognizable. The cancellation of these grants is not only disgraceful, but it will be devastating.”

Police will and should always have an important role in crime and violence reduction. But we cannot and should not rely on them exclusively to have the monopoly on public safety in our society. Police are always going to run up against a wall with a significant segment of the population most at risk of committing and falling victim to gun violence.

Let’s not cut funding for programs that aim to assist law enforcement and relieve some of that incredible burden that falls on them.