The Phoenix TRUCE Project was modeled after the Chicago CeaseFire program. There have been relatively few process and impact evaluations on the model compared to the level of funding and attention the program has rendered. This paper presents findings related to the evaluation of the TRUCE project. We found that the program engaged in a strong media campaign, conducted conflict mediations, and identified high-risk individuals for case management. The program did not, however, establish a coordinated and collaborative relationship with the faith-based community or other community groups. Time-series analysis showed that program implementation corresponded to a significant decrease in overall levels of violence by more than 16 incidents on average per month, a decrease of 16 assaults on average per month, and resulted in a significant increase of 3.2 shootings on average per month, controlling for the comparison areas and the trends in the data.
Details
- Evaluation of the Phoenix TRUCE Project: A Replication of Chicago CeaseFire
- Fox, Andrew M. (Author)
- Katz, Charles (Author)
- Choate, David (Author)
- Hedberg, Eric (Author)
- College of Public Service and Community Solutions (Contributor)
- Digital object identifier: 10.1080/07418825.2014.902092
- Identifier TypeInternational standard serial numberIdentifier Value0741-8825
- This is an Author's Accepted Manuscript of an article published as Fox, Andrew M., Katz, Charles M., Choate, David E., & Hedberg, E. C. (2015). Evaluation of the Phoenix TRUCE Project: A Replication of Chicago CeaseFire. JUSTICE QUARTERLY, 32(1), 85-115. DOI: 10.1080/07418825.2014.902092.
Copyright Taylor & Francis, available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07418825.2014.902092
Citation and reuse
Cite this item
This is a suggested citation. Consult the appropriate style guide for specific citation guidelines.
Fox, Andrew M., Katz, Charles M., Choate, David E., & Hedberg, E. C. (2015). Evaluation of the Phoenix TRUCE Project: A Replication of Chicago CeaseFire. JUSTICE QUARTERLY, 32(1), 85-115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2014.902092