Reducing Gang Violence Using Focused Deterrence: Evaluating the Cincinnati Initiative to Reduce Violence (CIRV)
Abstract
Research indicates that focused deterrence interventions are associated with violence reductions, although levels of success vary across sites. It is unknown if these strategies can produce sustained reductions over time, and if the variation in success is due to differences in program activities and dosages. This study provides a detailed description and evaluation of the Cincinnati Initiative to Reduce Violence (CIRV), a focused deterrence violence reduction strategy implemented in Cincinnati, Ohio. CIRV’s organizational structure and enhanced social services were designed to address sustainability issues that threaten to undermine long-term success. Results from our pooled time series regression models indicate that two violent outcomes—group/gang-member involved homicides and violent firearm incidents—declined significantly following implementation. These declines were observed in both 24- and 42-month post-intervention periods, but not in comparison outcomes. Additional analyses, however, reveal that provision of social services was not responsible for the significant and sustained decline.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Evidence of sustained impacts on gun crime during a multiyear period is sparse.
“In particular, evidence of sustained impacts on gun crime during a multiyear period is sparse.24,25,26,27,28”
From The Peacemaker Fellowship and Urban Gun Violence in Richmond, California (2026) · cites this paper as [25]
Cites
Tyler, T. R. (2006) · doi:10.1515/9781400828609 · Cited by 5,156 · see citing works
BRAGA, A. A., KENNEDY, D. M., WARING, E. J., & PIEHL, A. M. (2001) · Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency · doi:10.1177/0022427801038003001 · Cited by 589 · see citing works
Overdispersion and Poisson Regression
Berk, R., & MacDonald, J. M. (2008) · Journal of Quantitative Criminology · doi:10.1007/s10940-008-9048-4 · Cited by 299 · cited 1× · see citing works
“According to Berk and MacDonald (2008), overdispersion in a count distribution is quite complex and that omitted variable bias is most likely the major driving influence that leads to this type of empirical distribution.”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Peacemaker Fellowship and Urban Gun Violence in Richmond, California
Bruno, A., Darling-Hammond, S., Cabrera, J. R., Mujahid, M. S., & Corburn, J. (2026) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.31298 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Engel, R. S., Tillyer, M. S., & Corsaro, N.
- Affiliations
- University of Cincinnati (US)
- Corresponding author
- Engel, Robin S.
- Venue
- Justice Quarterly
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2011-11-07
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 403-439
- ISSN
- 0741-8825 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-9109
- OpenAlex
- W2082431805
- Cited by
- 124
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 18.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Justice Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
- Social Sciences › Health › Gun Ownership and Violence Research
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
- Keywords
- focused deterrence, gang violence, homicide, social services, program sustainability, program dosage, Cincinnati
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review