Violence prevention can’t be bought – Wirepoints

By: Matt Rosenberg

Last month in Chicago, and to great applause, a new study was unveiled showing the supposed benefits of a violence prevention program called READI. It accents subsidized jobs and counseling to prevent violence among at-risk young men. After 20 months it substantially cut the odds participants will get arrested anew for murder or shootings. Advocates say now’s the time to spend up to a billion annually – in taxpayer money on programs like READI. There’s a frank admission baked into all this. That we should try to buy with public resources something that parents, pastors, and politicians can’t manage to achieve: a Chicago where young black men don’t shoot at and kill each other so often. 

There’s a big problem, though. The research that’s being hailed as proof of concept is anything but that. The study itself, authored by the University of Chicago Crime Lab, flat out admits that READI – which stands for Rapid Employment And Development Initiative – has no overall net positive effect. 

That’s because while the report shows the program reduces the likelihood participants will be arrested for or victimized by murders or shootings, participants “are not any less likely to be arrested for other…forms of violence” including criminal sexual assault, armed robbery, and aggravated assault and battery committed without a weapon.

Researchers strongly accent 20-month gains in reducing the worst outcomes but also concede “READI participation has no significant impact on the main outcome of the study” which is the average likelihood of all forms of violence being measured.

So, sorry. Like Ken Kesey and his Merry Pranksters said: you’re either on the bus – or off the bus. If you’re in the violence program but still jacking cars, phones and wallets while brandishing a knife or gun, or beating people harshly, or raping them – you’ll remain a menace to society. 

Another problem with the READI study is that the 20-month time frame currently being used to measure the program’s effectiveness is too short; and will still be too short even after a planned 40-month evaluation is completed. 

Of participants in the study, 98 percent had previous arrests, with an average of 17. There’s ongoing debate over the best way to measure whether habitual criminals have reformed, or not. Long story short: timeframes for assessing repeat offenses, also known as recidivism, range from 3 to 9 years among criminal justice policy experts. Different criteria of relapse are used, ranging from mere arrests to convictions plus sentencing.

In any case, for the sake of political expediency, the three-year measure is greatly preferred by those with a vested interest in declaring the success of corrective programs funded at taxpayer expense. But for society’s protection it’s best to take the long view. That’s not what researchers looking at READI have yet had an opportunity to do within their current study framework. 

Compared to the nine-year measure of recidivism – or even the five-year or seven-year measure sometimes used as a compromise – a time frame of 20 months tells us next to nothing, and even 40 months will quite arguably fall short. 

Here’s why. The Illinois Department of Corrections (IDOC) reports there’s a felony recidivism rate – including technical violations of terms of release – of 38.5 percent after three years for adult offenders released in 2018. 

But with a longer measure, the percentage jumps greatly. A 2018 report from the state’s Sentencing Policy Advisory Council (SPAC) shows that 62 percent of freed felony offenders who were behind bars in 2007 were convicted and sentenced anew within nine years. The figure was 51 percent for former adult felony and misdemeanor offenders sentenced to probation rather than prison. So, the average of the three groups was 56 percent.

Some readers might note that the methodologies are slightly different; READI emphasizes re-arrests while SPAC and IDOC measure re-convictions. True, but the basic point holds. The more time that passes, the greater the odds that previous offenders will reoffend.

The stakes are high, and one must admire the initiative of the Crime Lab for digging into how to go at the vexing problem of predatory violence which threatens Chicago’s future. They’ve also done important data analysis in recent years, including documenting the staggering murder rates in specific black Chicago communities

But we need solutions that actually work, and keep working over the long haul. So how about dispensing actual criminal justice in Cook County courts more often? And letting Chicago Police actually be police again. The idea being to arrest, prosecute, convict, and deter. 

That 62 percent of released adult felony prisoners in Illinois were within nine years convicted and sentenced for new crimes, could mean the “tough on crime” approach is a lousy deterrent. Or it could mean just the opposite: that punishment as currently dispensed isn’t strong enough. Or that some chose an ongoing life of crime, no matter the consequences.

The real issue is how best to change behavior. Violence prevention programs including READI go at it partly through something called “cognitive behavioral therapy.” One big aspect of CBT, as it’s called, is learning how to control quick angry emotions and wounded pride. So that you don’t shoot someone for showing you disrespect. You grow stronger and more effective in the end by mastering your anger.

Too many young men at risk aren’t getting the message. Listening to bereaved mothers and siblings on the news several times weekly imploring city leaders to “do something, now” about the violent crime wracking Chicago, there’s no cogent response at hand. So it’s tempting to throw money and good intentions at intractable problems. 

But foundation and government money are transitory. These interventions never last. Dial it back to Ground Zero. This all starts with the tone and tenor of life in the home.

It’s about being raised with a moral code

Money can’t buy that. But our political leaders could certainly advocate for that. And strenuously. 

If they had the courage.

Read more from Wirepoints:

31 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Doug
1 year ago

Sounds like paying for a new very expensive pump to drain 30% of the water out of a sinking boat with a gaping hole in the hull created by the same people who want taxpayers to buy the pump. Government policies created the welfare state of incentivizing single parenting. It refused to acknowledge the enormous damage done despite overwhelming proof within a few short years after the Great Society programs of 1965. Economists and Social Scientists like Thomas Sowell, Walter E Williams and Shelby Steele all saw what was happening to the enormous progress blacks had made during the first… Read more »

Silverfox
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug

And now it’s become almost de rigueur for single women to have babies out of wedlock, to use a very old-fashioned phrase, or through surrogacy, and raise the child without benefit of a father. It’s not leading anywhere good. That’s for sure. And yes, the Democratic Party just cheers them on because chances are very good that these women will need welfare, child care, medical care, free education, etc. etc. and the Dems will be there to provide it and create another generation dependent on the Democratic Party. And you and I will have to pay for it. And morality… Read more »

Marie
1 year ago

I’m sorry but I’m totally against paying people to behave and do the right thing. We’ve already paid them not to work and we see where that got us. In Illinois we pay for abortions or babies till they’re 18. We pay them to feed their children and send them to school. We pay them to go to Walmart and buy a dozen donuts from the bakery, why, because they’re nutritious? We pay them to wear pajama pants and flip flops to go shopping. We pay their doctor bills and rent. We pay for their heat and air conditioning and… Read more »

Tim Favero
1 year ago

It’s not surprising that READI is not a success the way politicians and other city officials try to make it a success.

Ataraxis
1 year ago

This is a great analysis, thanks Matt.
Not enough attention is paid in society to the effects of crime on the victims, too much focus is on rehabilitation of the criminals, which usually doesn’t work.

1 year ago
Reply to  Ataraxis

Thank you. I agree and part of the effect on victims is that too often there is little justice meted out to the perp. Beyond arrest rates (which are important and we will be reporting on further), there’s that whole chain of custody of a criminal case. Reporting on case outcomes is weak because too often it requires trips to the courthouse to actually see court records. A good start would be digitized public records in Cook County on ultimate outcomes of each charged homicide, aggravated assault, aggravated battery, and each carjacking and other armed robberies. Was the case dropped… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by Matt Rosenberg
Ataraxis
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt Rosenberg

Totally agree. In this age of data covering everything, the glaring and purposeful omissions of court and judge data stands out.
I would like to see a Sunday afternoon grass roots victims of crime event on Daley Plaza where all of the politicians and the court system are called out for favoring criminals and ignoring victims. This would be the year to do it with the mayoral election. An event like this could be an emotional and cathartic event that just may get the attention of the city leaders, and could snowball if done effectively.

Silverfox
1 year ago
Reply to  Ataraxis

Great idea, but do you think Daley Plaza would be big enough to hold all the victims for even the past year? Might need more space than Daley Plaza could provide.

Ataraxis
1 year ago
Reply to  Silverfox

An overflow crowd in Daley Plaza may induce others to attend future events.

1 year ago
Reply to  Ataraxis

so true. I recall a phrase, um, “Say Their Names”……

Ataraxis
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt Rosenberg

I think a protest modeling the Ladies in White from Havana could be effective. This could also be helpful for grieving families to memorialize their loved ones.

debtsor
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt Rosenberg

Some but not all victims think that there is too little justice for the perp. Many communities take a ‘live by the sword, die by the sword’ approach to life. They only get upset when the state intervenes in their violent activities. That’s why they really don’t care about black on black crime. But when the state becomes involved? Well, that’s a different story, because it interferes with their right to seek their own retribution. These communities have an ethic of revenge, which they are perfectly OK with. They say they aren’t OK with it yet they keep doing it.

SadStateofAffairs
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt Rosenberg

Well said Matt and again thank you for continuing to illuminate in this period of darkness for journalism. Most Americans are fairly pragmatic and have now gone beyond the issues are parents may have had regarding race. Conservatives need to continue to push the most diverse candidates to run for office as this is walking and talking proof that POC want family integrity, fiscal responsibility, morals, tough on crime, and in general being less reliant on government. The real enemies are from within the Republican party who continue to do the Potomac Two-step. They will lie, cheat, and steal for… Read more »

nixit
1 year ago

An economy built on paying people not to shoot and rob others. Not sure I would call this an investment as much as extortion.

Heyjude
1 year ago

We already have an example of a successful program to reduce violent crime – from NYC in the 1990’s. Murders were reduced from about 2500 per year in the late 80’s to about 900 per year in the mid 90’s. But rather than implement a proven effective strategy, politicians prefer to wring their hands and throw money to their donors.

Last edited 1 year ago by Heyjude
Silverfox
1 year ago

Thanks for telling it like it is, Mr. Rosenberg. That’s truth, maybe hard to hear, but the truth nonetheless. Even religious institutions have failed, offering little in the way of guidance. Very sad.

Honest Jerk
1 year ago

Isn’t it great to live in a city that conducts experiments with public safety instead of simply locking criminals behind bars?

jajujon
1 year ago

So this program promotes itself as barely treading water? In other words, its best hope is that it “breaks even” in keeping young men out of prison? How is that improving the situation? And why does nearly everyone in government seem to hail that as success? Mediocrity = winning! According to the American Action Forum, the US government offered 47 programs in 2019 for job training and spent nearly $19B doing so. A prime example of desperately throwing programs and money to fund them, not knowing (or caring) that they’ll work. But look, we did something! Let’s go have lunch.… Read more »

Ataraxis
1 year ago
Reply to  jajujon

Something like $19 trillion (!!) has been spent on Great Society programs since inception.

Mark Felt
1 year ago

As usual, liberal crime prevention plans focus on how much money is being spent on a program, not the results it achieves.

Pat S.
1 year ago

Thank you, Matt Rosenberg for a concise analysis.

Throw more money at it hasn’t worked before and won’t work now. Something basic is missing and I think you nailed it with ‘moral code.’

Ex Illini
1 year ago

Programs like this reek of desperation. They are an acknowledgement that we need to do something, but we have no idea what it is. The truth is cold and hard, and that’s rarely the path taken. No one wants to admit the truth anyway. You’ve called it out here, but you’ll be accused of racism before anyone in charge admits you’re right. Getting people to take personal accountability for their actions is difficult. So blame others, throw other people’s money at it and pretend that you’re making a difference by lying with numbers. It’s the liberal way.

SIGN UP HERE FOR FREE WIREPOINTS DAILY NEWSLETTER

Home Page Signup
First
Last
Check all you would like to receive:

FOLLOW US

 

WIREPOINTS ORIGINAL STORIES

A statewide concern: Illinois’ population decline outpaces neighboring states – Wirepoints on ABC20 Champaign

“We are not in good shape” Wirepoints’ Ted Dabrowski told ABC 20 Champaign during a segment on Illinois’ latest population losses. Illinois was one of just three states to shrink in the 2010-2020 period and has lost another 300,000 people since then. Ted says things need to change. “It’s too expensive to live here, there aren’t enough good jobs and nobody trusts the government anymore. There’s just other places to go where you can be more satisfied.”

Read More »

WE’RE A NONPROFIT AND YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS ARE DEDUCTIBLE.

SEARCH ALL HISTORY

CONTACT / TERMS OF USE