REPORT

JSP Staff

The Kansas City Violence Prevention Fund (VPF) was created in response to historically high levels of violence, with the goal of investing in community-led solutions that address the root causes of violence rather than relying solely on system responses. The evaluation examines how violence is shaped by long-standing structural conditions including disinvestment, poverty, trauma, and limited access to opportunity and whether community-centered prevention strategies can interrupt these patterns. 

To do so, Justice System Partners conducted a multi-year, mixed-methods evaluation combining survey data on resilience and well-being, administrative data on arrests and program participation, and qualitative interviews with staff, participants, and community members. Programs were analyzed across three categories: community-wide, targeted prevention, and direct intervention, to understand how different strategies impact populations with varying levels of risk.

The primary goal of the evaluation was to assess whether VPF-funded programs reduce violence and system involvement while strengthening individual and community-level protective factors. Key research questions focused on:                                                                      (1) whether participation improves outcomes such as resilience, mental health, and social connectedness;                                                                                                                                            (2) whether programs reduce re-arrest and police contact, particularly among high-risk individuals;                                                                                                                                                    (3) how community-level efforts influence neighborhood safety and collective efficacy; and      (4) what conditions enable or constrain effective violence prevention. 

The evaluation also sought to understand how different intervention types function together as a broader prevention ecosystem, and how structural barriers such as resource limitations and inequitable neighborhood conditions shape both implementation and outcomes.

Findings show that community-centered prevention is effective but requires sustained investment and time to produce lasting change.

Participants experienced measurable improvements in resilience, reduced hardships, and low rates of new system involvement, while neighborhoods showed increased social cohesion and, in some cases, reduced exposure to violence. At the same time, the evaluation highlights five central insights:                                                                                                                                   (1) prevention works, but transformation is long-term;                                                                     (2) violence reduction requires community healing and sustained investment;                           (3) meeting basic needs (housing, employment, food) is itself violence prevention;                   (4) early investment in youth is critical to long-term impact; and                                                     (5) under-resourcing undermines otherwise effective programs. 

Together, these findings underscore a central conclusion: meaningful reductions in violence depend not just on programs, but on sustained investment in the conditions that allow individuals and communities to thrive.