Streetwork at the crossroads: An evaluation of a street gang outreach intervention and holistic appraisal of the research evidence
Abstract
Spurred by the success of public health violence interventions, and accelerated by policy pressure to reduce violence without exacerbating overpolicing and mass incarceration, streetwork programs—those that provide anti‐violence services by neighborhood‐based workers who perform their work beyond the walls of parochial institutions—have positioned themselves as the most important non–law‐enforcement violence prevention option available to urban policy makers. Yet despite their importance, the state of the field seems difficult to interpret for academics and practitioners alike. In this article, we make several contributions that bring forth new findings and deliver new perspectives on streetwork as a violence reduction strategy. First, we offer an extended analytic review of the streetwork evaluation literature that connects the study of contemporary public health violence interventions to a preceding tradition of criminologically inspired streetwork studies. Second, we present the results of an impact evaluation of StreetSafe Boston (SSB)—a multiyear streetwork intervention that served 20 Boston gangs. We find that the SSB intervention had no detectable effect on violence among the gangs that it served. We conclude by offering a framework for understanding a field at multiple crossroads: past and present, proclaimed successes and failures, help and harm.
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?
Evaluations of public health-oriented firearm violence reduction programs remain limited and mixed.
“evaluations of public health–oriented firearm violence reduction programs remain limited and mixed.23”
From The Peacemaker Fellowship and Urban Gun Violence in Richmond, California (2026) · cites this paper as [23]
Cites
Randomization Analysis of Experimental Data: The Fisher Randomization Test Comment
Rubin, D. B. (1980) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2287653 · Cited by 1,368 · see citing works
2. Toward a Theory of Race, Crime, and Urban Inequality
Sampson, R. J., & Wilson, W. J. (1995) · Crime and Inequality · doi:10.1515/9781503615557-004 · Cited by 911 · see citing works
Cure Violence: A Public Health Model to Reduce Gun Violence
Butts, J. A., Roman, C. G., Bostwick, L., & Porter, J. R. (2015) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031914-122509 · Cited by 398 · see citing works
Webster, D. W., Whitehill, J. M., Vernick, J. S., & Curriero, F. C. (2013) · Journal of Urban Health · doi:10.1007/s11524-012-9731-5 · Cited by 187 · see citing works
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
- Hureau, D. M., Braga, A. A., Lloyd, T., & Winship, C.
- Affiliations
- University at Albany, State University of New York (US)
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- Center for Policing Equity
- Harvard University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hureau, David M.
- Venue
- Criminology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2023-10-22
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 758-794
- ISSN
- 0011-1384 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-9125
- OpenAlex
- W4387858858
- Cited by
- 31
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 12.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Criminology (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Boston Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
- Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
- Keywords
- violence prevention, gang violence, impact evaluation, mass incarceration, urban violence
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