For Community Violence Intervention (CVI) to become a permanent part of public safety in our most impacted cities, there must be real-time accountability—not just in theory, but in practice. That means developing shared standards, implementing consistent evaluation, and ensuring quality at every level of service delivery.
We must also be careful in our efforts to professionalize CVI. We cannot bureaucratize it. In our push for evaluation, we cannot sterilize it. CVI is a deeply human practice—built on proximity, protective relationships and trust, lived experience, and love. As we pursue higher standards, we must also protect the spirit and soul of the work.
The challenge before us is clear: how do we strengthen implementation and evaluation in ways that protect CVI clients, makes CVI more credible, more consistent, and more sustainable—without compromising what makes it effective?
Across cities, the practice of CVI can vary dramatically. Some CVI efforts are highly structured, with clear protocols and training standards. Others are still finding their footing, often under-resourced and under-supported. In too many places, we’re asking violence interrupters and outreach workers to carry enormous weight—on call 24/7/365, managing persistent and ongoing street level tensions, mediating deadly conflict, walking into trauma—with minimal support and no clear career ladder.
We would never expect police or firefighters to operate without protocols, training, supervision, and infrastructure. CVI practitioners deserve the same respect—and resources.
To advance the CVI field, we must build and scale a culture of high-quality implementation. That includes:
- Core Practice Standards
Establish clear expectations for what CVI work entails—street outreach, conflict management & mediation, violence interruption, care management, community healing—and what competencies are required to deliver it well. These standards should be developed with practitioners, not just imposed on them.
- Training and Professional Development
Provide consistent, evidence-informed training for violence interrupters, outreach staff, and care managers. Create tiered pathways that support advancement and specialization. This is not just about skills—it’s about recognizing CVI as a legitimate profession.
- Supervision and Support Structures
Time and again, this truth proves true, that great CVI work is led by great managers. We must invest in leadership development for program directors, field coordinators, and frontline supervisors. And we must ensure every staff member has access to mental health support, peer debriefs, and time to rest.
- Local Learning Loops
Encourage teams to assess their own performance regularly—not just through annual reports, but through weekly roll calls, peer review, and reflection. Evaluation doesn’t have to come from outside. It can—and should—be baked into the culture.
Too often, evaluation is experienced as a burden. Something done to the field, not for it. This must change. Evaluation should help practitioners get better at their craft. It should provide real-time insights. It should tell the story not just of how many lives were touched—but how those lives were transformed.
To get there, we need:
- Evaluation Plans Co-Designed by Practitioners: Those closest to the work should help define success and shape how it’s measured.
- Process + Outcome Metrics: We must track not just end results (e.g., reductions in violence), but the quality and consistency of practice (e.g., how many interventions were completed, how many fellows achieved goals, how much support was provided).
- Dashboards that Help, Not Hurt: Data systems should be user-friendly, accessible to frontline staff, and designed to inform—not punish—daily work.
- CVI Clients should inform CVI Work: As my colleague and friend Dr. Jason Corburn continues to raise—rarely does CVI learning & Evaluation work speak to who CVI clients are beyond assets and deficits. Each has a story, each is unique, and who they are and why they came this way must inform the healing pathway forward.
As we push for standardization, we must avoid uniformity. CVI is rooted in community, and just like every fellow is different, so too is every community. Our standards must allow for local adaptation and cultural specificity.
This means:
- Providing Templates, Not Blueprints
Offer tools and guides but allow communities to adapt them to their context.
- Elevating Innovation from the Field
Create feedback loops where local practitioners can share what’s working—and shape the evolution of practice across the country.
- Avoiding the “Model Monopoly” Trap
There is no one-size-fits-all CVI approach. What should matter is fidelity to principles, not rigidity in practice.
To honor the transformative power of CVI, we must honor those who do the work. That means raising expectations—and raising support. It means insisting on quality—but never at the expense of authenticity. And it means building systems that hold the field accountable and have the field’s back.
CVI is not an experiment. It is a calling. And if we want it to last, we must treat it like any other essential service—with rigor, respect, and resolve.