New York City has long been a testing ground for innovative approaches to public safety, and its experience with the Cure Violence model offers valuable insights into how gun violence can be reduced without relying solely on law enforcement. By treating shootings as a contagious disease that can be interrupted through public health strategies, the city has demonstrated measurable success—and highlighted the importance of sustained investment in community-based solutions.
The Cure Violence Model: A Public Health Approach
Cure Violence, officially launched in 2000, is built on the premise that gun violence behaves like an infectious disease. Its spread can be controlled by interrupting transmission, changing social norms, and supporting those at highest risk. The model has since been adopted in more than 50 U.S. cities and 15 countries, including Honduras and Colombia. In 2012, New York City became one of the early adopters, integrating this approach into a broader citywide strategy that included mental health support and job training.
Building the Crisis Management System
New York’s commitment to violence prevention was formalized in 2013 with the creation of the Crisis Management System (CMS), a network of community organizations and services designed to address the root causes of shootings. Initially allocated $5 million, the CMS has grown to a budget of nearly $100 million today. This investment remains rare in the United States, especially as federal funding for violence prevention and research has declined in recent years.
“New York City often leads the country,” said Jon Burke, a surgery resident and epidemiology scholar who has studied the link between violence and municipal spending. “It’s one of the safest cities that provides robust social services for most things … but there are still neighborhoods in New York City with high levels of violence.”
Evidence of Success: Reductions in Shootings and Gun Injuries
Research has consistently shown that Cure Violence programs in New York have led to significant declines in gun violence. A 2017 study found that between 2005 and 2016, gun injuries dropped by 37% in the Bronx and 50% in Brooklyn. A more recent 2024 analysis estimated that between 2012 and 2023, the model prevented approximately 1,300 shootings citywide.
Alaa Moussawi, a data scientist who co-authored a New York City Council research report on the 2024 study, explained that the analysis compared precincts with and without Cure Violence programs, as well as trends over time. “This demonstrates that there are non-enforcement-based alternatives to reducing crime, shootings, and homicides,” he said. “Initiatives like Cure Violence are something that we should be looking into and potentially investing more into.”
How the Statistical Model Worked
Moussawi likened the analysis to a poker game where an experienced player encounters an unexpected sequence of events. “You realize that such gameplay could not have happened if it had not been triggered by some other catalysts,” he explained. “In our case, we’re suggesting that the catalyst [in the shooting reductions] could have very likely been Cure Violence.”
Grassroots Roots and Community Trust
The community-centric approach to violence prevention has deep roots in New York. Grassroots outreach by credible messengers dates back to the 1950s and 1960s, though it lost ground in the 1970s as policing became the primary focus. In 2003, a decade before Cure Violence arrived, a group called Man Up! Inc. began working with young children in East New York, Brooklyn, through mentoring and summer programs. The organization later expanded to serve teenagers and adults facing social and economic challenges.
When Cure Violence identified areas with the highest shooting injury risk, East New York topped the list. The 2017 study found that between 2009 and 2016, shooting victimizations in East New York fell by 15%. Similarly, the Bronx’s Save Our Streets program, which uses the Cure Violence approach, saw a 63% decrease in shooting victimizations during the same period.
The Role of Confidentiality and Trust
Sheyla Delgado, a violence prevention researcher at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and co-author of the 2017 study, emphasized the importance of trust. “One of the ‘secret sauces’ of the Cure Violence strategy is the trust that the participants have with the program staff; what is promised to them is confidentiality,” she said. “They do not record names, last names, or any identifiable information, and I believe the city and the programs have been really, really consistent in keeping that promise alive throughout the past nearly 15 years.”
Delgado also noted that areas with Cure Violence programs saw a 33% decline in serious disputes, compared to 12% in areas without them. “It is those lower-level, or more what I might consider insignificant [conflicts], that eventually evolve into something more serious. So focusing on that … actually intervening in that type [of] stuff would help the program become more successful in avoiding more serious conflicts,” she said.
Challenges and Future Directions
Despite its success, evaluating the full impact of New York’s Crisis Management System remains difficult. Delgado would like to assess the system as a whole, including hospital responder services and housing assistance, but frequent departmental changes over the past decade have made such research challenging.
Meanwhile, gun violence continues to affect other parts of the country. States like Alabama and Mississippi have some of the highest gun homicide rates, and rural areas now outpace urban centers in overall firearm mortality. Although the Biden administration supported violence prevention initiatives, many high-risk locations still lack the infrastructure to build similar intervention networks.
For experts like Moussawi, highlighting successful research can help build political will. He pointed to Baltimore, which has adopted a holistic approach using credible messengers and is seeing significant declines in homicides. New York’s early investment in violence intervention has placed it at the forefront of research and practice, according to Delgado.
“Each [mayoral] administration has elevated it and taken it further, expanding the program,” Delgado said. “So it’s one of the non-policing strategies that is embedded in the public safety efforts of the city.”
Conclusion: Lessons for the Nation
New York City’s experience with Cure Violence demonstrates that gun violence prevention is not limited to law enforcement. By investing in community-based organizations, credible messengers, and public health strategies, cities can achieve meaningful reductions in shootings and homicides. The key ingredients—trust, confidentiality, and sustained funding—offer a blueprint for other communities seeking to address violence at its roots.