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.
Girma et al. (Fri,) studied this question.