Urban Peace Institute and the undersigned organizations share the following statement concerning changes to federal funding for community violence intervention (CVI).
Dear Partners,
We are writing to express urgent concerns regarding the current direction of the Department of Justice’s Community Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative (CVIPI) grant program. When this initiative launched under the Biden Administration, it represented a historic and much-needed investment in community-led, non-punitive approaches to violence reduction work. It uniquely prioritized compassion, mentorship, and healing for those at the highest risk of being shot by centering dignity, trust, and public health principles over punishment.
Our intent in raising these concerns is to ensure alignment between federal, state, and local investments in violence reduction and the established evidence base for community violence intervention. We share the goal of reducing harm and improving safety; our concern lies in how the FY25 funding structure advances—or undermines—those goals.
Among our primary concerns are the recent changes to the structure and language of this initiative which represent a significant and troubling departure from the initiative’s original values. These shifts include:
- Community-based organizations (CBOs) no longer being eligible to apply directly for CVIPI funding. Under the FY25 structure, only units of local government may apply, relegating CBOs to subrecipient roles and limiting their ability to design and lead interventions responsive to community needs.
- The initiative now being explicitly law enforcement–centered. The current stated purpose is to “support law enforcement efforts to reduce violent crime and improve police-community relations,” prioritizing enforcement-based approaches such as focused deterrence and cross-sector crime reduction strategies. This is a sharp deviation from the intended purpose to invest in evidence-informed, community-driven strategy.
- The solicitation now mandates compliance with federal immigration enforcement statutes, including 8 U.S.C. §1373, and prohibits any activity that “impedes or hinders” immigration enforcement. This effectively excludes undocumented community members from receiving social services they would have otherwise had access to and raises major concerns about data sharing, trust, and safety.
Community-based programs have consistently demonstrated measurable reductions in shootings and homicides when allowed to operate with independence and community trust. Shifting this work under an enforcement framework not only undermines those outcomes but risks reversing years of progress toward sustainable, community-centered safety strategies.
These changes also present profound operational and ethical challenges. Outreach professionals and credible messengers already operate in high-risk environments, and requiring coordination with federal law enforcement—including the Department of Homeland Security —exposes them to greater danger and jeopardizes the credibility they depend on to build peace. Furthermore, we are concerned the grant could cause government agencies and organizations to violate state and local “sanctuary” laws aimed to protect immigrant communities. This is of great concern as CVI work requires staff to engage the most vulnerable communities in the nation to ensure safety and build trust. It appears as though the current federal administration is weaponizing unfounded allegations of gang involvement which could further criminalize both Black and Brown communities. As we have witnessed in Washington D.C. and Chicago, the scope of ICE enforcement morphed to include “public safety” issues.
Given these shifts—and the administration’s increasingly heavy-handed approach to law enforcement, including greater cooperation with ICE and the deployment of National Guard troops to police U.S. citizens—we believe it is critical to ensure that partners committed to non-punitive violence intervention are not exposed to risks such as:
- Programmatic collaboration, voluntary or otherwise, that could lead to participant arrests;
- The blurring of boundaries between law enforcement and violence intervention roles; or
- Information sharing that supports or facilitates ICE operations or other punitive enforcement measures.
For these reasons, we do not recommend that any of our CVI partners apply for these funds as an applicant or subcontracted agency.
We remain committed to advancing community-led solutions that heal, protect, and empower, rather than criminalize–especially our most vulnerable neighbors. In alignment with the national CVI field, the work must remain independent from law enforcement to protect the safety of frontline intervention professionals, maintain their credibility in the field, and ensure community trust. We urge agencies and partners to carefully assess the implications of engaging with the FY25 CVIPI grant program, and to uphold fidelity to our shared values and the safety of those we serve.
In solidarity,
Fernando Rejón on behalf of Urban Peace Institute, the undersigned organizations and additional supporters who have chosen not to be publicly listed
Alliance for Community Empowerment
Arise & Go
Advocates for Peace and Urban Unity
Black Lives Matter Paterson
Brothers Taking Responsibility of Our Community (BTROC)
CBPS Collective
Center for Research on Crime, University of Southern California
Champions in Service
Chicago CRED
Community Based Public Safety Collective
Community Warriors 4 Peace
Garden Pathways
GIFFORDS Center for Violence Intervention
HELPER Foundation
Life-Line Colorado
National Association of Reentry Professionals, Inc.
New Jersey Communities for Accountable Policing
New Life Centers of Chicagoland
Newark Community Street Team
Overflow Health Alliance Inc
Resilient Agency
Southern California Ceasefire
Southern California Crossroads
STRONG SHOULDERS
Toberman Neighborhood Center
Victory Outreach
Volunteers of America Los Angeles
Watts Life United Inc