Prison Violence Intervention

The Prison Violence Intervention (PVI) aims to enhance safety and security in prisons for both staff and incarcerated people, and create the conditions necessary for treatment, rehabilitation, and effective reentry. PVI relies on direct communication with incarcerated people through call-ins, as well as briefings during intake and documents distributed to cells, to deliver an anti-violence message from community members, information about consequences for further violence, and an offer of help for those who want it. The strategy uses the National Network’s process to identify the institution’s key players and target serious prison offenses such as assaults against staff, multi-prisoner fights, and assaults with weapons.

In call-in meetings, prison staff informs incarcerated persons that further violence by any member of a group will result in swift, certain consequences for its members—things meaningful to prisoners, like limits on telephone privileges, personal radio use, television access, or time in the yard. The prison also invites family, influential community members, and formerly incarcerated people to speak to prisoners, sharing their experiences with the damage caused by group-related violence. Finally, prison staff explain the help they can offer—opportunities like substance abuse counseling, and GED and vocational classes aimed at making good use of their time and helping them come out prepared.

Initial reports from the Washington State Department of Corrections, where the strategy was piloted, suggest that it has resulted in significant decreases in violent acts against staff and other prisoners.

Research

Warner, B., Pacholke, D., & Kujath, C. (2014). Operation Place Safety: First Year in Review. Washington Department of Corrections, Unpublished Report.

Guides

Acknowledgement of Harm: Reconciliation Practice Brief

Acknowledgements of harm—clear and specific statements about the harmful impacts of policing, delivered by police leaders—are the first step towards creating meaningful conversations about repair. Stating plainly that what happened was real and matters, when those truths have so often been swept under the rug, lends credibility to commitments to change and collaboration. Just as in interpersonal relationships, when harms go unnamed, they continue to create tension and distrust. By openly taking responsibility for these harms on behalf of their department and the broader institution of policing, police leaders make their work to build legitimacy more effective.

Police Leaders Acknowledge Past Harm: Examples

Law enforcement leaders from around the United States are increasingly beginning to address past harms through clear acknowledgements of their profession’s historical missteps and strong statements regarding a new vision for police conduct. These statements reflect a belief in the responsibility to acknowledge previous ills, and the conviction that recognition of the resulting harm is the first step toward building community trust, and shaping a more just law enforcement culture. The following are examples of public statements made by prominent police officials acknowledging these past harms.

Addressing the Few: Applying Focused Deterrence to Police Misconduct

The costs of police misbehavior and misconduct are incalculable. A wide range of behaviors—from verbal abuse to fatal uses of force—have ripple effects far beyond

Community Violence and Intimate Partner Violence Intersections White Paper

Two of the most devastating forms of violence affecting communities in the United States are community violence (CV) and intimate partner violence (IPV). Each year,